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, John Jaramillo, was accused of inappropriately touching his minor niece, B.V., on multiple occasions when she was five or six years old. B.V. testified that the Defendant touched her inappropriately three times, threatened to kill her if she disclosed the abuse twice, and asked her to pull her pants down once. The Defendant denied these allegations. At the time of the trial, B.V. was twelve years old (para 2).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellee (State of New Mexico): Argued that the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support the Defendant's convictions on all counts, including three counts of criminal sexual contact of a minor in the second degree (CSCM II), one count of CSCM III, and two counts of intimidation of a witness.
• Defendant-Appellant (John Jaramillo): Challenged the sufficiency of the evidence for all counts and argued that his convictions for two counts of CSCM II and two counts of intimidation of a witness violated his right to be free from double jeopardy (para 1).

Legal Issues

• Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the Defendant's convictions for CSCM II, CSCM III, and intimidation of a witness.
• Whether the Defendant's convictions for two counts of CSCM II and two counts of intimidation of a witness violated his right to be free from double jeopardy.

Disposition

• The Court reversed the Defendant's conviction for one count of CSCM II (Count 2) due to insufficient evidence.
• The Court held that the Defendant's convictions for two counts of CSCM II (Counts 1 and 3) and two counts of intimidation of a witness (Counts 5 and 6) violated double jeopardy, instructing to vacate one count of CSCM II and one count of intimidation of a witness.
• The Court affirmed the Defendant's remaining convictions (para 18).

Reasons

• The Court, consisting of Judges Jennifer L. Attrep, J. Miles Hanisee, and Megan P. Duffy, found that there was insufficient evidence to support the Defendant's conviction for one count of CSCM II (Count 2) as the victim did not provide testimony from which a reasonable inference could be drawn that the Defendant touched the victim's unclothed genitals. The Court also found that the Defendant's convictions for two counts of CSCM II and two counts of intimidation of a witness violated the principle of double jeopardy, as the acts were not sufficiently distinct to justify multiple punishments. The Court applied the rule of lenity, mandating an interpretation that the Legislature did not intend multiple punishments for the same offense, and thus one of the CSCM II convictions and one of the intimidation convictions must be vacated. The Court affirmed the Defendant's remaining convictions, finding sufficient evidence to support them, including the conviction for CSCM III, where the victim testified to feeling the Defendant's penis move on her legs while sitting on his lap (paras 3-17).