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, representing himself, appealed a district court order that dismissed his appeal from the metropolitan court due to the absence of a final order. The metropolitan court proceedings concluded with the filing of a nolle prosequi, without any judgment or final order being entered.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Appellee (State of New Mexico): [Not applicable or not found]
• Appellant (Paul Keith Reyes): Responded to the calendar notice with a memorandum in opposition to the proposal to affirm the district court's dismissal of his appeal.

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court properly dismissed the Defendant's appeal from the metropolitan court for lack of a final order.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's order dismissing the Defendant's appeal.

Reasons

• J. Miles Hanisee, Judge, with Jonathan B. Sutin and Michael E. Vigil, Judges concurring, found that appellate jurisdiction is generally limited to appeals from final decisions, orders, or judgments. Since there was no final metropolitan court order in the record or available online, and considering the requirement for finality in appeals from the metropolitan court to the district court as per Rule 5-827(A) NMRA, the district court's dismissal of the Defendant's appeal was affirmed (paras 1-2).