AI Generated Opinion Summaries

Decision Information

Decision Content

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

Facts

  • The Defendant was stopped at a DWI checkpoint and subsequently arrested and charged with driving while intoxicated (DWI), no insurance, and expired registration. At trial, the constitutionality of the checkpoint was challenged, leading to a conditional plea of guilty to DWI, first offense, with the right to appeal the checkpoint's constitutionality reserved (paras 2-3).

Procedural History

  • District Court of Bernalillo County, Ted Baca, District Judge: Affirmed Defendant’s conviction for DWI in an on-record appeal from metropolitan court (para 1).

Parties' Submissions

  • Defendant-Appellant: Argued that (1) his right to confrontation was violated due to the inability to question Sergeant Torres about his role in the DWI checkpoint, and (2) the evidence did not establish that the checkpoint's location was reasonable (para 3).
  • Plaintiff-Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

  • Whether the Defendant's right to confrontation was violated because he could not question Sergeant Torres regarding his role in the DWI checkpoint.
  • Whether the evidence presented established that the location of the DWI checkpoint was reasonable.

Disposition

  • The district court’s judgment affirming the Defendant's conviction for DWI was affirmed (para 8).

Reasons

  • Per JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge (MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, Judge, TIMOTHY L. GARCIA, Judge concurring), the court found that the Defendant's right to confrontation was not violated as this right does not extend to suppression hearings, citing State v. Rivera. Regarding the checkpoint's constitutionality, the court considered factors from City of Las Cruces v. Betancourt and State v. Madalena, concluding that the checkpoint was reasonable and constitutional based on the evidence presented, including the lack of discretion by officers in selecting the checkpoint location and the legitimate bases for site selection (paras 4-7).
 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.