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 accused of criminal sexual contact of a minor against two victims, E.R. and R.S., in separate cases. In both instances, the Defendant pleaded no contest to one count of false imprisonment with intent to commit a sexual offense against each victim. The incidents involved the Defendant restraining the victims with the intent of committing sexual offenses. Following these no-contest pleas, the district court ordered the Defendant to pay restitution for costs associated with the victims' education and mental health care, which were deemed related to the Defendant's criminal conduct.

Procedural History

• State v. Antonio Quintero, No. D-307-CR-2018-00542 (3rd Jud. Dist. May 29, 2020): Holding not specified.
• State v. Antonio Quintero, No. D-307-CR-2018-01110 (3rd Jud. Dist. May 29, 2020): Holding not specified.

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the restitution orders were contrary to the victim restitution statute, asserting that they compelled him to pay for damages related to mental anguish, and contended that the causal link between his conduct and the harms was too attenuated.
• Plaintiff-Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court's restitution orders, compensating for educational and medical expenses related to the victims' mental anguish, were contrary to the victim restitution statute, NMSA 1978, § 31-17-1.
• Whether there was a direct, causal relationship between the Defendant's criminal conduct and the victims' damages, sufficient to justify the restitution orders.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed both restitution orders.

Reasons

• The Court, per Ives, J., with Duffy, J., and Yohalem, J., concurring, held that:
  The restitution was ordered as compensation for pecuniary losses, not for mental anguish, aligning with the victim restitution statute's provisions (paras 5-9).
  Substantial evidence supported the district court's findings on causation between the Defendant's conduct and the victims' pecuniary losses, justifying the restitution orders (paras 10-14).