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

• On April 23, 2011, during a sobriety checkpoint conducted by the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office, Deputy Patrick Rael observed Defendant Laressa Vargas' vehicle stopped before the checkpoint. After approaching the vehicle, Deputy Rael detected the odor of alcohol from the vehicle and Vargas, who appeared nervous, confused, and had bloodshot, watery eyes. Vargas initially denied consuming alcohol but later admitted to it after failing field sobriety tests (FSTs) and a breath test indicating a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .04/.05. Despite the low BAC, Deputy Rael requested a blood test due to Vargas' poor performance on the FSTs, which she initially agreed to but later refused. Vargas was charged with aggravated driving while intoxicated (DWI) (paras 3-5).

Procedural History

• Metropolitan court (trial court): Convicted Vargas of aggravated DWI.
• District Court of Bernalillo County: Affirmed the trial court’s sentencing order and filed a memorandum opinion (para 1).

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Challenged the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the conviction and argued the unconstitutionality of the arresting officer’s request for a blood test and the inclusion of evidence regarding her refusal to submit to a blood test (para 1).
• Plaintiff-Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction for aggravated DWI.
• Whether the defendant may be held criminally liable for refusing to submit to a warrantless blood test based on implied consent (para 2).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals of the State of New Mexico affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for resentencing on the charge of DWI, impaired to the slightest degree, reversing Defendant's conviction of aggravated DWI (para 26).

Reasons

• Per M. Monica Zamora, Judge (Michael E. Vigil, Chief Judge, and Michael D. Bustamante, Judge, concurring):
  The court found sufficient evidence to support the conviction for DWI, impaired to the slightest degree, based on Defendant's behavior, the odor of alcohol, her performance on FSTs, and her admission of alcohol consumption (paras 7-12).
  The court concluded that, following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Birchfield v. North Dakota, a defendant cannot be criminally liable for refusing to submit to a warrantless blood test based on implied consent. It held that the evidence of Defendant's refusal to submit to a blood test should have been excluded and that her aggravated DWI conviction, based on this refusal, was reversed (paras 13-25).