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 placed on three years' probation following a joint plea and disposition agreement in two separate district court cases. Nine months into her probation, the State moved to revoke it due to the Defendant's unsuccessful discharge from an inpatient treatment program. The district court found the Defendant had willfully violated her probation terms by failing to complete the inpatient treatment but continued her preexisting probation without changing or adding any terms (paras 2-3).

Procedural History

• District Court of San Juan County: The court found that the Defendant had willfully violated her probation terms by failing to complete inpatient treatment and continued her preexisting probation without imposing any different or additional terms (para 2).
• District Court of San Juan County, September 5, 2018: The court found the Defendant had violated her probation terms twice more, revoked her probation, and remanded her into custody. The Defendant was released on November 21, 2018, upon completing her sentence (para 2).

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellee (State of New Mexico): Argued for the revocation of the Defendant's probation due to her unsuccessful discharge from an inpatient treatment program (para 2).
• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that her right to confront witnesses at the probation revocation hearing was violated and that the evidence was insufficient to support the finding of a willful violation of probation (para 1).

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court violated the Defendant's right to confront witnesses at the probation revocation hearing.
• Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the district court’s finding that the Defendant willfully violated probation.

Disposition

• The appeal was dismissed as moot (para 5).

Reasons

• The panel, consisting of Judges Megan P. Duffy, Jennifer L. Attrep, and Briana H. Zamora, concluded that the Defendant's appeal was moot. This determination was based on the fact that the Defendant had already served her entire sentence and did not challenge her convictions on appeal. Therefore, even if the court found in favor of the Defendant on her claims, no actual relief could be granted. The court also noted that the parties did not raise any collateral consequences that could arise from the district court's order continuing the Defendant's probation. Furthermore, the court declined to exercise its discretion to review the appeal on grounds of substantial public interest or the potential for the issue to reoccur but evade review, as the Defendant did not request this and the issue was not adequately briefed (paras 3-4).