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

• Petitioner filed a handwritten petition in the district court seeking a grand jury investigation into whether fraud was committed in connection with two non-profit corporations, EcoVersity and Prajna Foundation. The petition, titled "Rescue EcoVersity," was supported by 339 identical petitions without addresses, claiming to represent the signatures of registered voters from Santa Fe City and County, aiming to meet the constitutional requirement of two percent of the county's registered voters to convene a grand jury (paras 1-2).

Procedural History

• District Court of Santa Fe County, Michael E. Vigil, District Judge: Denied the petition to convene a grand jury due to inability to verify signatories as registered voters without addresses, dismissing the cause with prejudice (para 3).

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner: Argued that the New Mexico Constitution does not require addresses to accompany signatures on a petition to convene a grand jury, asserting that the number of signatures met the constitutional requirement (paras 1-2, 4-5).
• Respondents (County Clerk, EcoVersity, Prajna Foundation, and Jeffrey Harbour): Contended that without addresses, it was impossible to verify the signatories as registered voters of Santa Fe County, thus failing to meet the constitutional requirements for convening a grand jury (paras 2-3).

Legal Issues

• Whether the New Mexico Constitution requires addresses to accompany signatures on a petition to convene a grand jury (para 5).
• Whether the petitioners met the constitutional requirements for convening a grand jury with the signatures provided (para 4).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals of New Mexico reversed the district court's decision, holding that the New Mexico Constitution does not require addresses to accompany signatures on a petition to convene a grand jury, and remanded for further proceedings (para 16).

Reasons

• The Court, per Judge Roderick T. Kennedy, with Judges Jonathan B. Sutin and Michael E. Vigil concurring, reasoned that the New Mexico Constitution only requires the requisite number of signatures that can be matched to the voter rolls as those of registered voters, without any requirement for voters' addresses. The Court applied the plain meaning rule to the Constitution, emphasizing the importance of maintaining the simplicity and accessibility of the petitioning process. It was determined that once the County Clerk confirmed the number of signatures matched names on the County's voter rolls, the constitutional requirement was satisfied. The Court also noted that the burden of production shifts to the opponents of the petition to demonstrate that the signatures are not those of registered voters within the county, once the petitioners have presented a petition with a sufficient number of signatures purporting to be those of registered voters (paras 4-14).