AI Generated Opinion Summaries

Decision Information

Decision Content

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 on probation following a no-contest plea to felony offenses. The State alleged that the Defendant violated probation by possessing firearms and ammunition and failing to seek permission before changing his residence. During a home visit, the probation officer found firearms and ammunition in the Defendant's residence. The Defendant claimed the firearms belonged to his girlfriend and that he was unaware of the ammunition (paras 2-3).

Procedural History

  • District Court of Otero County: The Defendant's probation was revoked based on violations related to ammunition possession and failure to report a change of residence (para 4).

Parties' Submissions

  • Appellant: The Defendant argued that there was insufficient evidence to prove that his probation violations were willful, particularly regarding the ammunition found in his home (para 2).
  • Appellee: The State contended that the Defendant violated probation by possessing ammunition and failing to report a change of residence, and that these violations were willful (para 4).

Legal Issues

  • Was there sufficient evidence to prove that the Defendant's probation violations were willful?

Disposition

  • The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision to revoke the Defendant's probation (para 7).

Reasons

Per Wray J. (Hanisee and Henderson JJ. concurring): The Court found that the State met its burden of proving a willful violation of probation. The Defendant failed to present evidence to excuse his non-compliance with the probation conditions. The district court was within its discretion to find a willful violation based on the ammunition found in the Defendant's residence. The Court noted that the Defendant did not contest the revocation based on his failure to report a change of residence, which alone justified affirmance (paras 5-6).

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.