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 October 26, 2018, in Albuquerque, New Mexico, Javier Ponce, Jr. fatally shot Nicholas Mendoza. The incident occurred at a triplex apartment building where Ponce and the victim had a confrontation. Ponce was charged with first and second degree murder, tampering with evidence, and two counts of child abuse by endangerment related to two children, Georgia and Angelina, who were in close proximity to the shooting. The jury found Ponce guilty of voluntary manslaughter, a lesser included offense of the murder charges, and convicted him of tampering with evidence and child abuse by endangerment (paras 1, 3-4).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant (Javier Ponce, Jr.): Argued that the evidence was insufficient to convict him of child abuse by endangerment for both Georgia and Angelina, emphasizing that the State failed to prove he was aware of the children's proximity to the line of fire or that they were in foreseeable danger (para 2).
• Appellee (State of New Mexico): Maintained that the jury correctly found Ponce guilty of child abuse by endangerment for Georgia, asserting that Ponce was aware of the children's presence and the substantial risk of harm his actions posed. The State conceded that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction for child abuse by endangerment of Angelina (paras 11, 23).

Legal Issues

• Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's convictions for child abuse by endangerment of Georgia and Angelina.

Disposition

• Affirmed the conviction for child abuse by endangerment of Georgia.
• Reversed the conviction for child abuse by endangerment of Angelina (para 25).

Reasons

• The Court, with Judge Jane B. Yohalem presiding and Judges Jacqueline R. Medina and Zachary A. Ives concurring, found sufficient evidence to support the conviction for child abuse by endangerment of Georgia, citing testimony that she was in close proximity to the shooting and could have been in danger. The Court agreed with the State's concession that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction for child abuse by endangerment of Angelina, noting her distance from the shooting was too great to constitute a substantial and foreseeable risk of harm. The decision emphasized the legal standards for child abuse by endangerment, requiring a substantial and foreseeable risk of harm and a reckless disregard for the safety of the child. The Court applied these standards to the facts, affirming the conviction related to Georgia based on the proximity and potential risk to her safety, while reversing the conviction related to Angelina due to the lack of substantial and foreseeable risk posed by the defendant's actions (paras 11-24).