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, a County Road Supervisor, was accused of misusing public funds by having wheel rims installed on his personal truck and billing the costs to the County under a false invoice. Additionally, he entered a plea agreement in a separate case involving charges of paying or receiving public money for services not rendered and conspiracy to commit the same offense (paras 2-6).
Procedural History
- District Court of Dona Ana County: The Defendant was convicted by a jury of making or permitting a false public voucher and fraud in one case. In a separate case, he entered a plea agreement, pleading no contest to two charges in exchange for the dismissal of other counts. The trial court denied his motion to withdraw the plea agreement and sentenced him to 18 months in prison, fines (suspended), and restitution of $13,133.40 (paras 1, 6-7).
Parties' Submissions
- Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the trial court erred in denying his motion to withdraw the plea agreement because he was not adequately informed of the potential restitution amount, which exceeded the $322 specified in the plea. He also contended that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury's verdict in the fraud and false public voucher case (paras 8-9, 19).
- Plaintiff-Appellee: Asserted that the Defendant's plea agreement and conspiracy conviction allowed for restitution for all losses caused by the conspiracy, including dismissed charges. The State opposed the motion to withdraw the plea and argued that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict (paras 7, 15).
Legal Issues
- Whether the trial court erred in denying the Defendant's motion to withdraw his no contest plea and plea agreement (para 1).
- Whether sufficient evidence existed to support the jury's verdicts of making or permitting a false public voucher and fraud (para 1).
Disposition
- The Defendant's convictions in the fraud and false public voucher case were affirmed (para 24).
- The trial court's denial of the Defendant's motion to withdraw his plea in the conspiracy case was reversed, and the matter was remanded for further proceedings (para 24).
Reasons
Per Donnelly J. (Alarid and Flores JJ. concurring):
Motion to Withdraw Plea Agreement: The court found that the Defendant was not adequately informed of the potential restitution amount at the time of entering the plea agreement. Restitution for dismissed charges or offenses outside the conspiracy's timeframe required explicit notice and agreement, which were absent in this case. The trial court's failure to provide such notice rendered the plea invalid, warranting its withdrawal (paras 10-18).
Sufficiency of Evidence: The court held that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdicts. Testimony and records demonstrated that the Defendant knowingly misrepresented facts to the County, causing public funds to be used for personal expenses. The jury was entitled to reject the Defendant's explanation and find him guilty of fraud and making or permitting a false public voucher (paras 19-23).