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 charged with two counts of criminal sexual penetration of a minor (CSPM) and one count of criminal sexual contact with a minor (CSCM), all involving his six-year-old granddaughter. The charges were based on allegations of sexual activity with the child. During the trial, testimony was provided by the child and Dr. Karen Carson, who performed a sexual assault nurse examination (SANE exam) on the child. The child testified that the Defendant touched her inappropriately, and Dr. Carson testified about the child's statements during the SANE exam and her findings from the examination.

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of Chaves County, Charles C. Currier, District Judge.
• Certiorari Denied, May 25, 2011, No. 32,921.
• Released for Publication July 19, 2011.

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant (Defendant): Argued that the district court erred in allowing Dr. Carson to testify about hearsay statements made by the child during the SANE exam, contended that the drawing made by the child during the SANE exam was inadmissible, claimed insufficient evidence to support the conviction, and argued that allowing Dr. Carson's testimony violated the Sixth Amendment right to confrontation.
• Appellee (State): Argued that Dr. Carson's testimony was properly admitted pursuant to Rule 11-803(D) NMRA, contended that the error in admitting testimony regarding the child's drawing was harmless, and maintained that there was sufficient evidence and no violation of the Sixth Amendment right to confrontation.

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in allowing Dr. Carson to testify about hearsay statements made by the child during the SANE exam.
• Whether the district court erred in admitting the drawing made by the child during the SANE exam.
• Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction.
• Whether allowing Dr. Carson to testify about the child's statements during the SANE exam violated the Defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation.

Disposition

• The court affirmed the judgment of the district court.

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, led by Chief Judge Celia Foy Castillo, with Judges Jonathan B. Sutin and Linda M. Vanzi concurring, held that Dr. Carson’s testimony regarding the child's account of abuse and identification of the Defendant as the perpetrator was properly admitted under Rule 11-803(D) NMRA. However, the testimony regarding the child's drawing of a penis was admitted in error, but this error was deemed harmless. The court found no merit in the Defendant's arguments regarding the sufficiency of the evidence and the alleged violation of the Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, as the child testified at trial and the Defendant had the opportunity to cross-examine her (paras 1-34).