AI Generated Opinion Summaries

Decision Information

Decision Content

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

  • In February 2019, the Defendant entered a guilty plea to criminal charges and was placed on probation with a special condition prohibiting her from entering any prison grounds. The State filed a motion to revoke her probation in April 2019, alleging she violated this condition by attempting to bring Suboxone, a controlled substance, to an inmate at a correctional facility in Hobbs (paras 2-4).

Procedural History

  • [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

  • Plaintiff-Appellee (State of New Mexico): Argued that the Defendant violated her probation condition by attempting to bring a controlled substance into the prison and that the prison parking lot should be considered part of the prison grounds (paras 2-4).
  • Defendant-Appellant (Andria Nieto): Contended that the State failed to prove the prison parking lot was part of the "prison grounds" as required by her probation conditions, arguing that evidence such as signage, legal ownership, or blueprints was necessary to establish this (para 5).

Legal Issues

  • Whether the prison parking lot constitutes "prison grounds" for the purposes of determining a probation violation (para 5).

Disposition

  • The district court’s decision to revoke the Defendant's probation was affirmed (para 6).

Reasons

  • The panel, consisting of Judges Julie J. Vargas, Jacqueline R. Medina, and Megan P. Duffy, unanimously affirmed the district court's revocation of the Defendant's probation. The court concluded that the prison parking lot could be considered part of the prison grounds based on its designation for use by the prison facility, referencing a precedent that generally treats parking lots as part of the premises. This conclusion was reached despite the Defendant's argument that there was insufficient evidence to prove the parking lot was part of the prison grounds under her probation conditions (paras 5-6).
 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.