Case Information
*1 This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the filing date.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE, ex rel.
ALBUQUERQUE POLICE DEPARTMENT,
Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NO. 35,446 ONE (1) 1996 DODGE P/U SILVER,
VIN: 1B7HF16ZXTJ191924,
NEW MEXICO LICENSE # 294RLJ,
Defendant,
and
DIANNA WALLER,
Claimant-Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY Alan M. Malott, District Judge
City of Albuquerque Legal Department
Jessica Hernandez, City Attorney
Kyle Hibner, Assistant City Attorney
for Appellee
Dianna Wallen *2 Pro Se Appellant
MEMORANDUM OPINION
WECHSLER, Judge. Claimant-Appellant Dianna Waller (Appellant) has sought to appeal from an
order granting forfeiture pursuant to the City of Albuquerque’s DWI-related civil forfeiture ordinance. We previously issued a notice of proposed summary disposition in which we proposed to dismiss. Defendant has filed a memorandum in opposition. After due consideration, we remain unpersuaded.
{2} As we previously observed, the filing of a timely notice of appeal is a mandatory precondition to this Court’s jurisdiction. In re Yalkut , 2008-NMSC-009, ¶ 24, 143 N.M. 387, 176 P.3d 1119 (per curiam). In this case, Appellant filed her notice of appeal nearly a month late. We therefore proposed to dismiss. See, e.g. , Chavez v. U-Haul Co. of N.M. , 1997-NMSC-051, ¶¶ 19-22, 124 N.M. 165, 947 P.2d 122 (declining to hear an appeal filed thirty days late). In her memorandum in opposition Appellant offers neither any basis for
extending the filing deadline nor any justification for the delay. [MIO 2] Instead, we understand Appellant to invite the Court to consider the “extensive facts” and the merits of the appeal notwithstanding the untimely filing. [MIO 29A] We decline. *3 Accordingly, for the reasons stated above and in the notice of proposed summary disposition, we dismiss. IT IS SO ORDERED.
________________________________ JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge WE CONCUR:
________________________________
LINDA M. VANZI, Judge
________________________________
J. MILES HANISEE, Judge