AI Generated Opinion Summaries

Decision Information

Citations - New Mexico Laws and Court Rules
Chapter 66 - Motor Vehicles - cited by 2,961 documents

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 case involves the appeal of Defendant Kari Hoihjelle's convictions by the New Mexico Court of Appeals. Specific details leading to the convictions are not provided in the available text.

Procedural History

  • District Court of Bernalillo County, Brett Loveless, District Judge: Issued a judgment and sentence against Defendant Kari Hoihjelle, details of which are not specified in the provided text.

Parties' Submissions

  • Appellant (Defendant Kari Hoihjelle): The specific arguments made by the appellant are not detailed in the provided text.
  • Appellee (State of New Mexico): The State has indicated that it does not intend to file a memorandum in opposition to the Court's proposed disposition, suggesting agreement or no contest to the appellate court's preliminary decision.

Legal Issues

  • Whether the conviction of Defendant Kari Hoihjelle for violating NMSA 1978, Section 66-3-804 (1981, amended 2018) should be upheld.

Disposition

  • The conviction of Defendant Kari Hoihjelle for violating NMSA 1978, Section 66-3-804 (1981, amended 2018) is reversed.
  • The remainder of the judgment and sentence entered by the lower court is affirmed.

Reasons

  • Per LINDA M. VANZI, J. (with JENNIFER L. ATTREP, J., and KRISTINA BOGARDUS, J., concurring): The appellate court proposed to affirm, in part, and reverse, in part, the judgment of the district court. The defendant did not respond to this proposal, and the State did not oppose it. Based on the lack of opposition from both parties and the appellate court's preliminary analysis, the conviction under NMSA 1978, Section 66-3-804 (1981, amended 2018) was reversed, while the rest of the lower court's judgment and sentence were affirmed (para 1).
 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.