State v. Lucero
Opinion
This decision of the New Mexico Court of Appeals was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Refer to Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished decisions. Electronic decisions may contain computer- generated errors or other deviations from the official version filed by the Court of Appeals.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO
No. A-1-CA-39042
STATE OF NEW MEXICO,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
FRANK LUCERO,
Defendant-Appellant.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF CHAVES COUNTY Dustin K. Hunter, District Judge
Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General Santa Fe, NM
for Appellee
Frank Lucero Roswell, NM
Pro Se Appellant
MEMORANDUM OPINION
HANISEE, Chief Judge.
{1} Summary affirmance was proposed for the reasons stated in the notice of proposed summary disposition. No memorandum opposing summary affirmance has been filed, and the time for doing so has expired. AFFIRMED.
{2} IT IS SO ORDERED.
J. MILES HANISEE, Chief Judge
WE CONCUR: ZACHARY A. IVES, Judge
JANE B. YOHALEM, Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Lucero (State v. Lucero) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.