Court of Appeals of New Mexico

Decision Information

Citations - New Mexico Laws and Court Rules
Rule Set 12 - Rules of Appellate Procedure - cited by 9,423 documents

Decision Content

STATE V. BACA

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 Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions.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.
ANTHONY BACA,
Defendant-Appellant.

No. A-1-CA-36262

COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO

October 18, 2018


APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF CURRY COUNTY, Fred T. Van Soelen, District Judge

COUNSEL

Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General, Santa Fe, NM, for Appellee

Bennett J. Baur, Chief Public Defender, Caitlin C.M. Smith, Assistant Appellate Defender, Santa Fe, NM, for Appellant

JUDGES

J. MILES HANISEE, Judge. WE CONCUR: JULIE J. VARGAS, Judge, DANIEL J. GALLEGOS, Judge

AUTHOR: J. MILES HANISEE

MEMORANDUM OPINION

HANISEE, Judge.

{1}       Defendant Anthony Baca appeals from his conviction of aggravated assault. This Court issued a notice of proposed disposition, proposing to summarily affirm, and a second notice of proposed disposition, proposing to summarily affirm, in part, and reverse, in part. Defendant filed a memorandum in support of summary reversal and opposition to summary affirmance (DMIO), stating that he “relies upon the facts and arguments contained in his initial memorandum in opposition to proposed summary affirmance,” and supports our proposed reversal in part. [DMIO 1] The State also filed a response to our proposed disposition (SMIO), by which it “informs the Court that after due consideration it will not be filing a memorandum in opposition.” [SMIO 1] Accordingly, and for the reasons stated in our notice of proposed disposition, as remain applicable, and our second notice of proposed disposition, we affirm Defendant’s conviction of aggravated assault, but reverse the district court’s designation of the conviction as a serious violent offense.

{2}       IT IS SO ORDERED.

J. MILES HANISEE, Judge

WE CONCUR:

JULIE J. VARGAS, Judge

DANIEL J. GALLEGOS, 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.