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 case involves the State of New Mexico's Children, Youth & Families Department's (CYFD) petition against Stephanie R., the mother of R.J., Jr. and J.J., alleging child abuse and neglect. The district court adjudicated the child as abused and neglected, finding the existence of aggravated circumstances.

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County: Adjudicated the child as abused and neglected, finding the existence of aggravated circumstances.

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellee (CYFD): [Not applicable or not found]
• Respondent-Appellant (Mother): Argued against the district court's exclusion of her expert witnesses' testimony from the adjudicatory trial, claiming it was relevant to the determination of whether the child's injuries were accidental or inflicted by her and asserting that the exclusion violated her due process rights.
• Respondent (Father): [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in excluding the testimony of Mother's expert witnesses during the adjudicatory trial.
• Whether the exclusion of the expert testimony constituted a violation of Mother's due process rights.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's order adjudicating the child as abused and neglected.

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, consisting of Judges Megan P. Duffy, Shammara H. Henderson, and Jane B. Yohalem, found no error in the district court's decision. The court noted that the mother abandoned four issues initially raised and focused solely on the exclusion of her expert witnesses' testimony. The court held that the mother failed to provide a sufficient explanation of the facts underlying the issue and did not establish that the district court abused its discretion in concluding that the evidence was not sufficiently relevant. The court also noted that the mother did not demonstrate error in the exclusion of the testimony or provide a developed contention required to amend a docketing statement to show good cause and a viable issue regarding the potential challenge to the effectiveness of her counsel. Consequently, the court affirmed the district court's order without reassigning the matter to the general calendar, emphasizing the mother's failure to demonstrate error or sufficient grounds for such reassignment (paras 1-8).