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 after a jury trial of one count of criminal sexual penetration in the first degree (child under 13), two counts of criminal sexual contact in the second degree (child under 13) (CSCM), and bribery of a witness (threats) (reporting).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that he received ineffective assistance of counsel, raising five issues initially and later adding a new issue regarding the misclassification of one of the criminal sexual contact charges from second degree to third degree based on the specifics of the conduct involved.
• Plaintiff-Appellee (State of New Mexico): Agreed with the Defendant-Appellant on the misclassification of the criminal sexual contact charge but opposed the ineffective assistance of counsel claims.

Legal Issues

• Whether the Defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Whether the conviction for one count of criminal sexual contact in the second degree (child under 13) should be reclassified to third degree based on the specifics of the conduct involved.

Disposition

• The court reversed and remanded for resentencing on Count 3, changing the classification from second degree to third degree CSCM.
• The court affirmed on direct appeal the ineffective assistance of counsel issues.

Reasons

• The panel, consisting of Judges Cynthia A. Fry, Linda M. Vanzi, and M. Monica Zamora, provided the following reasons for their decision:
  Regarding Count 3: The court found that the evidence and jury instructions indicated that the Defendant caused the victim to touch his unclothed penis, which under State v. Trujillo, qualifies as third degree CSCM, not second degree. Both the Defendant and the State agreed on this misclassification, leading to the court's decision to reverse and remand for resentencing on this count (paras 2-5).
  Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: The Defendant's claims of ineffective assistance were based on discussions with trial defense counsel about various strategic decisions, including witness testimony and examination of evidence. The court determined that these claims relied on facts not contained in the record or were within the ambit of trial defense counsel’s strategic judgment. The court remained persuaded that the Defendant did not make a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal, citing precedents that emphasize the deference given to counsel's strategic decisions unless they fail to meet an objective standard of reasonableness (paras 6-9).