State v. Arenas

CourtNew Mexico Court of Appeals
DecidedJanuary 24, 2018
DocketA-1-CA-36551
StatusUnpublished

This text of State v. Arenas (State v. Arenas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Mexico Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Arenas, (N.M. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

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 Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions.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.

1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

2 STATE OF NEW MEXICO,

3 Plaintiff-Appellee,

4 v. NO. A-1-CA-36551

5 DAMIAN ARENAS,

6 Defendant-Appellant.

7 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF SAN JUAN COUNTY 8 Karen L. Townsend, District Judge

9 Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General 10 Santa Fe, NM

11 for Appellee

12 Bennett J. Baur, Chief Public Defender 13 Santa Fe, NM 14 Steven J. Forsberg, Assistant Appellate Defender 15 Albuquerque, NM

16 for Appellant

17 MEMORANDUM OPINION

18 VIGIL, Judge.

19 {1} Defendant appeals from his conviction for felony DWI, entered pursuant to a 1 conditional plea, wherein he reserved the right to appeal the district court’s denial of

2 his motion to dismiss on speedy trial grounds. This Court issued a calendar notice

3 proposing to affirm relying, in part, on State v. Hill, 2005-NMCA-143, ¶ 12, 138 N.M.

4 693, 125 P.2d 1175. Defendant has filed a memorandum in opposition requesting that

5 this Court revisit our holding in Hill. However, given that our holding in Hill was

6 premised on binding New Mexico Supreme Court precedent, we decline to revisit that

7 holding. As a result, we conclude that Defendant has not demonstrated a speedy trial

8 violation. Accordingly, we affirm.

9 IT IS SO ORDERED.

10 _________________________________ 11 MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Judge

12 WE CONCUR:

13 ___________________________ 14 JULIE J. VARGAS, Judge

15 ___________________________ 16 STEPHEN G. FRENCH, Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Hill
2005 NMCA 143 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
State v. Arenas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-arenas-nmctapp-2018.