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 two counts of third-degree criminal sexual penetration. The Defendant argued that the actions underlying his convictions constituted a single continuous assault, rather than separate acts, thus violating his right to be free from double jeopardy (paras 2-3).
Procedural History
- District Court of Santa Fe County: Convicted the Defendant of two counts of third-degree criminal sexual penetration.
Parties' Submissions
- Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the convictions violated his right to be free from double jeopardy, asserting that the actions were part of one continuous assault without distinct intent or intervening events (para 2).
- Plaintiff-Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]
Legal Issues
- Whether the Defendant's convictions for two counts of criminal sexual penetration violated the double jeopardy clause by constituting a single continuous assault.
Disposition
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the Defendant's convictions (para 8).
Reasons
Per Duffy J. (Henderson and Yohalem JJ. concurring): The Court conducted a unit of prosecution analysis to determine if the Defendant's acts were sufficiently distinct to justify multiple punishments under the same statute. The Court found that the acts were distinct based on the victim's testimony, which described separate acts of digital penetration and cunnilingus, with an intervening event when the victim's friend awoke and went to the restroom. The Court concluded that these facts, along with the timing and sequence of events, supported the jury's inference of distinct acts and intentions, thus upholding the convictions (paras 3-7).