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 June 24, 2015, the defendant was pulled over for speeding by Deputy Michael Shannon, who observed signs of intoxication. The defendant admitted to consuming alcohol and failed field sobriety tests but refused chemical testing. He was arrested and charged with aggravated DWI (para 2).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the district court erred in entering a conditional discharge order listing the crime as aggravated DWI when the jury only found him guilty of DWI under the impaired to the slightest degree standard (para 5).
• Plaintiff-Appellee (State): Conceded that the court should reverse and remand with instructions to amend the judgment and sentence, vacating the aggravated DWI conviction and replacing it with a conviction for DWI under the impaired to the slightest degree standard. Additionally, argued that the defendant’s sentence of a conditional discharge for DWI was illegal and suggested remanding for imposition of a statutorily compliant sentence (paras 5-6, 8).

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in entering a conditional discharge order listing the crime charged as aggravated DWI when the jury found the defendant guilty of DWI under the impaired to the slightest degree standard.
• Whether the district court may correct a purportedly illegal sentence when such issue has been raised by the State post-sentencing.

Disposition

• The court reversed the defendant's order of conditional discharge identifying his offense as aggravated DWI and remanded with instructions to enter a judgment convicting the defendant of DWI under the impaired to the slightest degree standard and to enter a sentence in conformity with the applicable statutes (para 12).

Reasons

• M. Monica Zamora, Chief Judge, with Megan P. Duffy, Judge, and Zachary A. Ives, Judge, concurring, found that the jury was only instructed on and found the defendant guilty of DWI under the impaired to the slightest degree standard, not aggravated DWI. Therefore, the order of conditional discharge identifying the offense as aggravated DWI was reversed. The court also agreed with the State that the sentence of conditional discharge was illegal as it conflicted with statutory mandates, specifically noting that conditional discharge orders are not permitted for DWI offenses under NMSA 1978, Section 31-20-13. The court concluded that it has the authority to correct an illegal sentence on appeal and directed that the sentence be in conformity with the applicable statutes, including the requirements for a third DWI conviction (paras 5-11).