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

• Sonny Gutierrez, a former employee and boyfriend of KFC assistant manager Louann Logan, robbed nearly ten-thousand dollars from her during her daily deposit routine of KFC's proceeds. In the process, Gutierrez struck Logan in the face, leading to his convictions for robbery and battery against a household member (paras 1-5).

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of Otero County, James Waylon Counts, District Judge.
• Certiorari Denied, August 13, 2012, No. 33,717.

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that his double jeopardy rights were violated as both convictions arose from the same criminal conduct (para 6).
• Plaintiff-Appellee (State of New Mexico): [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the defendant's convictions for robbery and battery against a household member, arising from the same criminal conduct, violate double jeopardy protections under the United States and New Mexico Constitutions (paras 6-7).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals of New Mexico affirmed the defendant's convictions for both robbery and battery against a household member (para 23).

Reasons

• Per J. MILES HANISEE, with JAMES J. WECHSLER and LINDA M. VANZI concurring, the court found that the defendant's unique combination of convictions did not offend double jeopardy principles. The court applied a two-part inquiry from Swafford v. State, determining that the conduct underlying the offenses was unitary but that the legislature intended to create separately punishable offenses. The Blockburger test was applied, showing that each offense required proof of a fact the other did not, indicating legislative intent for separate punishments. The court also considered the distinct policy directives and subject matter of the statutes, concluding that they addressed distinct deviant social conduct and were intended to be punished separately, even when occurring as part of the same criminal transaction (paras 7-22).