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

• On August 23, 2021, the Defendant was arrested for criminal trespass after being observed jumping over a fence surrounding a residence in Carlsbad, New Mexico. Following the arrest, while in a patrol car, the Defendant became erratic and damaged a plexiglass divider by kicking it, with repair costs estimated at $1,710. This estimate included charges for the car's transport from Carlsbad to Albuquerque and back. The jury convicted the Defendant of criminal trespass to property, criminal damage to property, and criminal damage over $1000 (para 4).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction of criminal trespass, the district court provided improper jury instructions regarding the criminal trespass charge, and the conviction for criminal damage to property over $1000 violated his right to equal protection (para 2).
• Plaintiff-Appellee (State): Conceded that there was insufficient evidence presented at trial to convict the Defendant of criminal trespass (para 2).

Legal Issues

• Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the Defendant's conviction for criminal trespass.
• Whether the district court provided improper jury instructions regarding the criminal trespass charge.
• Whether the Defendant's conviction for criminal damage to property over $1000 violated his right to equal protection.

Disposition

• The conviction for criminal trespass was reversed due to insufficient evidence.
• The conviction for criminal damage to property over $1000 was reversed, and the case was remanded for entry of judgment of conviction and resentencing based on the Defendant's conviction for misdemeanor criminal damage to property (para 10).

Reasons

• KRISTINA BOGARDUS, Judge, with ZACHARY A. IVES, Judge, and KATHERINE A. WRAY, Judge, concurring:
  The court agreed with the State's concession that there was insufficient evidence to support the Defendant's conviction for criminal trespass, noting the failure to establish the specific location of the alleged trespass (paras 5-6).
  The court did not address the Defendant's argument regarding improper jury instructions for criminal trespass due to the reversal of the conviction based on insufficient evidence (para 2).
  The court concluded that the evidence did not support the Defendant's conviction for criminal damage to property over $1000, specifically noting that the statute and jury instructions do not allow for the inclusion of additional charges such as transportation costs in the calculation of damage. Therefore, the actual damage caused by the Defendant was less than $1000, leading to the reversal of this conviction as well (paras 7-9).