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, Daniel McKinley, was convicted of multiple charges related to trafficking a controlled substance, tampering with evidence, and possession of a firearm. The appeal focuses on the convictions for conspiracy to commit trafficking a controlled substance and conspiracy to commit tampering with evidence, which the Defendant argues violate his double jeopardy rights due to being based on unitary conduct.

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of Otero County, Steven Blankinship, District Court Judge.

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the convictions for conspiracy to commit trafficking a controlled substance and two counts of conspiracy to commit tampering with evidence violate double jeopardy rights because they are based on unitary conduct.
• Plaintiff-Appellee: Conceded that the Defendant’s convictions for two counts of conspiracy to commit tampering with evidence violate double jeopardy and should be vacated but maintained the position on the remaining charges.

Legal Issues

• Whether the Defendant's convictions for conspiracy to commit trafficking a controlled substance and two counts of conspiracy to commit tampering with evidence violate his double jeopardy rights due to being based on unitary conduct.

Disposition

• The court vacated the Defendant’s two convictions for conspiracy to commit tampering with evidence and remanded for proceedings consistent with the opinion.

Reasons

• Per MEDINA, J., with HENDERSON, J., and BACA, J., concurring: The court held that the Defendant’s multiple conspiracy convictions violated his double jeopardy rights. The State failed to establish distinct conspiracies for the charges against the Defendant, and the actions were all part of one overarching conspiratorial agreement to traffic controlled substances. The State's argument that multiple conspiracies were created due to the Defendant and coconspirators adapting to police presence did not establish the existence of multiple agreements needed to support multiple conspiracies. Therefore, the court affirmed the conviction for trafficking a controlled substance (by possession with intent to distribute) (habitual offender) as the highest crime conspired to, while vacating the two convictions for conspiracy to commit tampering with evidence due to double jeopardy violations (paras 1, 3-8).