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 for Driving While Intoxicated in the metropolitan court.

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County, Brett R. Loveless, District Judge: Affirmed the metropolitan court conviction for Driving While Intoxicated.

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant (Defendant): Conceded that the calendar notice proposing to affirm her conviction contained no factual or legal errors and acknowledged that the Court does not have the power to revisit or change the Supreme Court case law controlling the outcome of this case (para 1).
• Appellee (State): [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the Court of Appeals should affirm the district court's on-the-record opinion affirming the Defendant's metropolitan court conviction for Driving While Intoxicated.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's on-the-record opinion affirming the Defendant's metropolitan court conviction for Driving While Intoxicated (para 2).

Reasons

• Per Michael D. Bustamante, J. (Roderick T. Kennedy, J., and Linda M. Vanzi, J., concurring): The Court decided to affirm the Defendant's conviction because the Defendant conceded that there were no factual or legal errors in the calendar notice proposing to affirm her conviction. Additionally, the Defendant recognized that the Court does not have the authority to revisit or change the controlling Supreme Court case law (para 1).