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 was convicted following a jury trial for multiple offenses including forgery, theft of identity, concealing identity, failure to transfer vehicle registration, and no insurance (para 1).

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of Curry County: The Defendant was convicted of forgery, theft of identity, concealing identity, failure to transfer vehicle registration, and no insurance.

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant: The Defendant filed a memorandum in opposition to the court's notice of proposed disposition, arguing against the summary affirmation of her convictions (para 1).
• Appellee: The State, represented by the Attorney General, argued in favor of affirming the Defendant's convictions, although specific arguments are not detailed in the decision.

Legal Issues

• Whether the Defendant's memorandum in opposition presents sufficient facts, authority, or argument to persuade the Court that the proposed summary disposition to affirm her convictions was incorrect (para 2).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the Defendant's convictions for forgery, theft of identity, concealing identity, failure to transfer vehicle registration, and no insurance (para 3).

Reasons

• Per MEDINA, J., with HANISEE, C.J., and HENDERSON, J., concurring:
  The Court found the Defendant's memorandum in opposition insufficient to challenge the proposed summary disposition. It held that the Defendant failed to clearly point out errors in fact or law, as required in summary calendar cases. The repetition of earlier arguments did not fulfill the requirement to specifically point out errors of law and fact (para 2).