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 Defendant entered a plea agreement, pleading no contest to charges of aggravated battery against a household member, with the condition of entering and successfully completing a drug court program for a suspended sentence and probation. However, after being charged with a new incident of domestic violence, the Defendant was terminated from the drug court program. The Defendant sought to enforce the original plea agreement, arguing that his termination from the drug court program was improper and that he was entitled to the benefits of the plea agreement despite the termination (paras 2-5).

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County, Christina P. Argyres, District Judge: Denied Defendant's motion to enforce the plea agreement and recusal motion.

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellee (State): Argued that the new charge against the Defendant constituted a violation of his conditions of release and that his termination from the drug court program negated the sentencing agreement in the plea and disposition agreement (para 3).
• Defendant-Appellant: Contended that he was not rejected from the drug court program based on his willingness to participate, that the district court judge's termination of him from the program was improper, and that he remained entitled to the benefits of the plea agreement. Additionally, the Defendant requested the recusal of the district court judge, alleging bias influenced by external communications and the judge's involvement in his termination from the drug court program (paras 5-6).

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court judge erred in refusing to enforce the plea agreement based on the Defendant's termination from the drug court program.
• Whether the district court judge erred in refusing to recuse herself after signing the order terminating the Defendant from the program.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court judge's denial of the Defendant's motion to enforce the plea agreement and recusal motion (para 25).

Reasons

• JULIE J. VARGAS, Judge (LINDA M. VANZI, Chief Judge, JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge concurring):
  The Court found no error in the district court judge's decisions. It held that the plea agreement was clear and unambiguous regarding the consequences of not completing the drug court program, and the Defendant's termination from the program did not entitle him to enforcement of the sentencing agreement in the plea agreement. The Court also found that the Defendant was afforded due process regarding his termination from the drug court program, having had multiple hearings to address the issue. Regarding the recusal motion, the Court determined there was no abuse of discretion by the district court judge, as there was no evidence of bias stemming from an extrajudicial source that could reasonably question the judge's impartiality (paras 13-24).