AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• An undercover narcotics agent, Deputy Calib Bruce, arranged to purchase methamphetamine from the Defendant, James Tyrone Manning, on December 9, 2015, at an Alamogordo gas station. During this operation, Manning sold Deputy Bruce methamphetamine and was subsequently identified and arrested. A second transaction was arranged on December 16, 2015, where Manning coordinated for another individual, Caresse Stanfill, to sell methamphetamine to Deputy Bruce. Both transactions involved the exchange of methamphetamine for money and were supported by photographic evidence, recorded communications, and positive drug tests for methamphetamine (paras 2-4).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions for trafficking methamphetamine by distribution and conspiracy to commit trafficking methamphetamine. Specifically, he contended there was no physical evidence linking him to the transactions and insufficient evidence of conspiracy due to the lack of observed communication between him and Stanfill during the second transaction (paras 6, 11).
• Plaintiff-Appellee: Maintained that substantial evidence supported the Defendant's convictions, emphasizing the recorded transactions, photographic evidence, and positive identification of the Defendant and his associate in the drug transactions (paras 9, 11).

Legal Issues

• Whether substantial evidence existed to support the Defendant's convictions for trafficking methamphetamine by distribution and conspiracy to commit trafficking methamphetamine.
• Whether the Defendant's sentence was properly enhanced to a first-degree felony based on a prior conviction for possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute (paras 6, 13).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the Defendant's convictions and sentence but remanded the case to the district court to correct typographical errors in the judgment and sentence (para 24).

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, per Judge Kristina Bogardus, found substantial evidence supporting the Defendant's convictions, citing the undercover agent's testimony, photographic evidence, recorded communications, and positive drug tests. The Court also held that the Defendant's sentence was properly enhanced under Section 30-31-20(B)(2), rejecting the Defendant's arguments against the enhancement and finding no violation of his constitutional rights against cruel and unusual punishment. The Court distinguished the present case from State v. Garduno, concluding that the prior conviction for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine was a valid basis for enhancing the Defendant's sentence for trafficking by distribution. The Court's decision was concurred by Judges Julie J. Vargas and Shammara H. Henderson (paras 5-23).