Court of Appeals of New Mexico
Decision Information
Rule Set 12 - Rules of Appellate Procedure - cited by 9,435 documents
Decision Content
STATE V. WOOD
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 Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions.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.
GREGORY A. WOOD,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 34,604
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO
June 17, 2015
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF OTERO COUNTY, Waylon
Counts, District Judge
COUNSEL
Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General, Santa Fe, NM, for Appellee
Gregory A. Wood, Santa Rosa, NM, Pro Se Appellant
JUDGES
MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Chief Judge. WE CONCUR: RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Judge, TIMOTHY L. GARCIA Judge
MEMORANDUM OPINION
VIGIL, Chief Judge.
{1} Self-represented Defendant Gregory A. Wood filed a docketing statement, appealing from his convictions for trafficking methamphetamine, possession of drug paraphernalia, and possession of marijuana or synthetic cannabinoids, as set forth in the district court’s judgment and sentence entered on January 9, 2015. [RP 128-29; DS 2] In this Court’s notice of proposed disposition, we proposed to dismiss the appeal for lack of a final order. [CN 1, 3-4] Defendant filed a timely response to our calendar notice, stating that he received “this final order from the district court,” and attaching such order.
{2} However, although the order attached to Defendant’s response does deny a pending motion to change or remove plea, it did not address the motion for reconsideration of sentence, specified in our calendar notice as rendering the judgment non-final. [CN 3] Accordingly, as there remains no order disposing of the motion for reconsideration of sentence, and for the reasons stated in this Court’s notice of proposed disposition, we dismiss the appeal for lack of a final order. We reiterate that Defendant is free to appeal from the final order of the district court once such order is entered. See Rule 12-201(A) NMRA.
{3} IT IS SO ORDERED.
MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Chief Judge
WE CONCUR:
RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Judge
TIMOTHY L. GARCIA Judge