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 in magistrate court for DWI (third offense) and appealed the denial of her motion to suppress evidence, following a conditional plea that reserved the suppression issue for appeal (para 1).

Procedural History

• District Court of San Juan County: Denied Defendant's motion to suppress evidence following her conviction in magistrate court for DWI (third offense) (para 1).

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the district court should consider the merits of her appeal despite the lack of a final order of dismissal and alternatively requested a limited remand to the district court for entry of the requisite final order (para 3).
• Plaintiff-Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction to consider the Defendant's appeal in the absence of a final order of dismissal by the district court (para 2-4).

Disposition

• The appeal was dismissed due to the absence of a final order from the district court dismissing the Defendant's appeal, as required for jurisdiction (para 4).

Reasons

• Per Roderick T. Kennedy, Chief Judge, with James J. Wechsler, Judge, and Cynthia A. Fry, Judge concurring, the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal. The court clarified the procedural requirements for conditional pleas in magistrate courts and the subsequent appeal process in district courts, as established in State v. Celusniak. It was determined that the district court's order denying the Defendant's motion to suppress did not include language dismissing the appeal, which is necessary for the order to be considered final and for the Court of Appeals to have jurisdiction. Consequently, without a final order, the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal (paras 1-5).