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

• Aaron Upchurch (Defendant) was convicted of larceny, burglary, conspiracy to commit larceny, and conspiracy to commit burglary. The case revolves around these convictions and the subsequent appeals.

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of San Juan County, John A. Dean, District Judge, July 18, 2012: The District Court convicted the Defendant of larceny, burglary, conspiracy to commit larceny, and conspiracy to commit burglary.

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant (Defendant): Argued for the reversal of his convictions, specifically renewing his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel but did not advance any new argument regarding this claim.
• Appellee (State): Indicated that it does not oppose the analysis proposed by the Court of Appeals, which suggested affirming in part and reversing in part the Defendant's convictions.

Legal Issues

• Whether the Defendant's convictions for larceny, burglary, conspiracy to commit larceny, and conspiracy to commit burglary should be upheld.
• Whether the Defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel.

Disposition

• Affirmed the Defendant’s convictions for larceny, burglary, and conspiracy to commit larceny.
• Reversed the Defendant’s conviction for conspiracy to commit burglary and the habitual offender sentence enhancement.
• Remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Court of Appeals' decision.

Reasons

• Per Michael D. Bustamante, J. (James J. Wechsler, J., and Roderick T. Kennedy, J., concurring): The Court of Appeals issued a second notice of proposed summary disposition, proposing to affirm in part and reverse in part the Defendant's convictions. The State did not oppose this analysis, and the Defendant substantially agreed but renewed his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel without presenting new arguments. The Court remained unpersuaded by the Defendant's renewed claim. Consequently, the Court affirmed the convictions for larceny, burglary, and conspiracy to commit larceny, reversed the conviction for conspiracy to commit burglary and the habitual offender sentence enhancement, and remanded for further proceedings.