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 for aggravated driving while intoxicated (DWI). He challenged the conviction by contending that the traffic stop leading to his arrest was pretextual, meaning it was based on an insufficient or fabricated reason.

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of Eddy County, Richard J. Brown, District Judge, June 4, 2012: Upheld the conviction for aggravated DWI.

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant (Defendant): Argued that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress and motion to dismiss, claiming the traffic stop was pretextual.
• Appellee (State): [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in denying the Defendant's motion to suppress and motion to dismiss based on the claim that the traffic stop was pretextual.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction for aggravated DWI.

Reasons

• Per Michael E. Vigil, J. (James J. Wechsler, J., and Timothy L. Garcia, J., concurring):
  The Court found no basis for relief from the Defendant's conviction, despite his contention that the traffic stop was pretextual. The district court had specifically found that the stop was not pretextual after considering the totality of the circumstances surrounding the stop. The standard of review requires viewing evidence in the light most favorable to the State, and the Defendant's assertions about the officer’s subjective motive for the stop presented no basis for relief. The Defendant's citation of State v. Ortiz was found inapposite as Ortiz involved a bad faith violation of discovery orders by the State, which was not paralleled in the present case. There was no indication that the State failed to comply with discovery orders or acted in bad faith, nor was there a determination that the Defendant was prejudiced. Therefore, the charges against the Defendant were not dismissed, and his conviction was affirmed.