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 was convicted of DWI (first offense) and speeding after being stopped by an officer. During the stop, the Defendant claimed to have been a passenger initially but was forced to switch seats with the actual driver, who threatened her, by the time the officer approached the vehicle (para 3).

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of Bernalillo County, Benjamin Chavez, District Judge, affirming the metropolitan court conviction for DWI (first offense) and speeding.

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the duress defense was applicable, claiming to have been forced to switch seats with the actual driver under threat (para 2). Also claimed ineffective assistance of counsel due to failure to timely subpoena a defense witness (para 4).
• Plaintiff-Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the duress defense is applicable in the Defendant's DWI case (para 2).
• Whether the Defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel (para 4).

Disposition

• The court affirmed the district court judgment, rejecting the duress defense and the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel (para 6).

Reasons

• J. MILES HANISEE, Judge, with JONATHAN B. SUTIN, Judge, and M. MONICA ZAMORA, Judge concurring, provided the opinion. The court held that the duress defense, while available in DWI cases, requires evidence of no reasonable legal alternative to violating the law, which the Defendant failed to provide. The court found the Defendant's testimony to be fabricated and thus rejected the duress defense (para 3). Regarding the ineffective assistance of counsel claim, the court determined that the Defendant did not make a prima facie showing of incompetence resulting in prejudice, noting that the failure to subpoena a witness was attributed to the Defendant's failure to disclose the witness to counsel prior to trial (para 4-5).