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 criminal sexual contact of a minor and battery. The convictions were based on the victims' testimony that the Defendant touched them in the manner charged.

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of Doña Ana County, Stephen Bridgforth, District Judge, May 31, 2011: Convictions for criminal sexual contact of a minor and battery were affirmed.

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant: Argued that the victims' testimony was not credible, referencing State v. Franklin and State v. Boyer to support claims that evidence introduced at trial called the victims' credibility into question and supported his version of events.
• Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the victims' testimony was sufficient to support the Defendant's convictions for criminal sexual contact of a minor and battery.
• Whether the Court of Appeals should reassess the credibility of the victims' testimony.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions for criminal sexual contact of a minor and battery.

Reasons

• Per Michael E. Vigil, J. (Celia Foy Castillo, Chief Judge, and Cynthia A. Fry, Judge, concurring):
  The Court of Appeals was not persuaded by the Defendant's arguments to reassess the credibility of the victims' testimony. It highlighted that the appellate court does not assess the credibility of witnesses, citing State v. Salas, and is required to view the evidence, and all reasonable inferences to be drawn from the evidence, in the light most favorable to the verdict, as established in State v. Cunningham. The Defendant's memorandum in opposition did not provide new facts, authority, or legal analysis that would persuade the Court that its proposed summary disposition was erroneous. Therefore, the convictions were affirmed based on the sufficiency of the victims' testimony and the appellate court's adherence to its role in reviewing evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict.