Court of Appeals of New Mexico

Decision Information

Citations - New Mexico Laws and Court Rules
Rule Set 12 - Rules of Appellate Procedure - cited by 9,435 documents

Decision Content

STATE V. GALLEGOS

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 Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions.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

STATE OF NEW MEXICO,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.

RAY DANIEL GALLEGOS,
Defendant-Appellant.

No. 35,412

COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO

January 30, 2017


APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY, Stan Whitaker, District Judge

COUNSEL

Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General, Laura E. Horton, Assistant Attorney General, Santa Fe, NM, for Appellee

Bennett J. Baur, Chief Public Defender, Will O’Connell, Assistant Public Defender, Santa Fe, NM, for Appellant

JUDGES

MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Judge. WE CONCUR: LINDA M. VANZI, Chief Judge, JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge

AUTHOR: MICHAEL E. VIGIL

MEMORANDUM OPINION

VIGIL, Judge.

{1}       Defendant appealed from a judgment and sentence. We issued a second calendar notice continuing to propose to affirm as to the issues initially raised in the docketing statement, but granting Defendant’s motion to amend and proposing to reverse as to the newly-raised issue, by which Defendant advanced a double jeopardy challenge.

{2}       Defendant has filed a responsive memorandum in which no new facts, arguments, or authorities are presented. The State has filed a responsive document indicating that it does not oppose.

{3}       Accordingly, for the reasons previously stated in the notices of proposed summary disposition, we reject the various issues and arguments initially advanced in the docketing statement. However, with respect to the double jeopardy challenge, we reverse and remand to the district court with instruction to vacate one of the convictions and re-sentence Defendant accordingly.

{4}       IT IS SO ORDERED.

MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Judge

WE CONCUR:

LINDA M. VANZI, Chief Judge

JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.