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

• The case involves the City of Santa Fe's petition for forfeiture of a vehicle operated by Mark Lopez, whose license had been revoked due to a DWI conviction. Lopez was stopped by police when they could not verify the vehicle's registration due to an obscured sticker. Upon checking, it was found that Lopez's license was revoked, and he presented an expired ignition interlock driver’s license from a previous DWI conviction. Despite having an ignition interlock device in his vehicle, his temporary license had expired about twenty months prior to the stop. Two days after the stop, Lopez obtained another temporary ignition interlock license (paras 2-3).

Procedural History

• District Court of Santa Fe County: The district court dismissed the City’s petition for forfeiture of Lopez's vehicle, concluding that the City’s vehicle forfeiture ordinance did not apply to Lopez’s conduct (para 1).

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellant (City of Santa Fe): Argued that the vehicle forfeiture ordinance applies to any vehicle operated by a person whose license is currently revoked as a result of a DWI conviction, including situations where a temporary ignition interlock driver’s license has expired (paras 7-8).
• Claimant-Appellee (Mark Lopez): [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether a vehicle operated by a person whose license has been revoked due to a DWI conviction and who has an expired temporary ignition interlock license is subject to the City’s Forfeiture Ordinance (para 1).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals reversed the district court's order dismissing the City’s petition for forfeiture of the vehicle (para 13).

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, with Judge Stephen G. French authoring the opinion, and Chief Judge Linda M. Vanzi and Judge Julie J. Vargas concurring, held that the City’s Forfeiture Ordinance applies to vehicles operated by individuals whose licenses are revoked due to DWI convictions, without exceptions for expired temporary ignition interlock licenses. The court reasoned that the ordinance's language is clear and unambiguous, aiming to protect the public from drivers violating license restrictions. The court found that the district court's distinction between an expired and revoked license was not supported by the ordinance or statutes, concluding that Lopez's vehicle was a public nuisance subject to forfeiture under the ordinance. The court emphasized adherence to the ordinance's plain language without creating exceptions or engaging in further interpretation (paras 4-12).