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 observed driving with a suspended license. When a law enforcement officer attempted to conduct a traffic stop, the Defendant fled, leading the officer on a high-speed chase through city streets, endangering other drivers. The Defendant eventually stopped, but then fled again, abandoning the vehicle. He was later found at his home, appearing under the influence of drugs, and admitted to driving while impaired by prescription medication (paras 4-6).
Procedural History
- District Court, January 24, 2022: The Defendant was convicted of aggravated fleeing a law enforcement officer and driving while under the influence of drugs (para 2).
Parties' Submissions
- Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions, claiming the officer did not verify his speed and that no accident occurred. Also contended that impairment from prescription medication could not be determined without a blood test (paras 2, 7-8).
- Plaintiff-Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]
Legal Issues
- Was there sufficient evidence to support the conviction for aggravated fleeing a law enforcement officer?
- Was there sufficient evidence to support the conviction for driving while under the influence of drugs?
Disposition
- The New Mexico Court of Appeals affirmed the Defendant's convictions (para 11).
Reasons
Per Hanisee J. (Medina and Ives JJ. concurring):
The Court found that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict on both charges. For aggravated fleeing, the jury instructions required proof that the Defendant drove willfully and carelessly, endangering others, which was supported by the officer's testimony and the Defendant's actions during the chase. The Court emphasized that it does not reweigh evidence or search for contrary inferences (paras 3-9). Regarding the DUI charge, the Defendant's admission of driving under the influence of prescription drugs, his impaired behavior, and inability to complete sobriety tests provided sufficient evidence for conviction (paras 10).