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

• A city housing employee requested assistance from Detective Sammy Marquez regarding individuals in an apartment who were not supposed to be there. Upon arrival, the detective observed a broken window and individuals leaving the apartment with items. The defendant, Marcus Cisneros, approached the detective, arousing suspicion due to his lack of knowledge about the apartment's occupants and the broken window. The detective conducted a pat-down search on Cisneros without verbal consent but with non-verbal compliance, leading to the discovery of a pipe and methamphetamine in Cisneros's possession.

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County, Charles Brown, District Judge: Denied the defendant's motion to suppress evidence found during the search.

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the district court erred in denying the motion to suppress evidence, claiming the initial detention lacked reasonable suspicion, the frisk exceeded the scope of a Terry frisk, and the seizures of the pipe and methamphetamine were not justified.
• Plaintiff-Appellee: Contended that the entire encounter was consensual, thus permitting the search and seizure of evidence.

Legal Issues

• Whether the initial detention of the defendant was without reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.
• Whether the Terry frisk was supported by specific articulable facts.
• Whether the seizure of the pipe and methamphetamine exceeded the scope of the Terry frisk.
• Whether there is a "plain feel" exception to the warrant requirement under Article II, Section 10 of the New Mexico Constitution.
• Whether the encounter was consensual, justifying the search and seizure.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's denial of the defendant's motion to suppress and upheld the convictions.

Reasons

• Per BUSTAMANTE, J. (with CELIA FOY CASTILLO, Chief, Judge, and RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Judge concurring), the court found substantial evidence supporting the district court's finding of consent for the search. The detective's testimony indicated that the defendant non-verbally consented to the search, and there was no evidence of duress or coercion. The court concluded that the defendant was detained but found the detention permissible due to reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. The court did not address the defendant's specific arguments against the search and seizure, as it affirmed the decision based on the finding of consent. The court also rejected the defendant's argument for a higher standard of consent under the New Mexico Constitution compared to the Fourth Amendment, affirming the convictions based on the consensual nature of the encounter.