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 on probation when the district court issued orders revoking her probation. The specifics leading to the probation and its subsequent revocation are not detailed in the provided text.

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of Torrance County: The district court's orders revoking the Defendant's probation were affirmed.

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that she received ineffective assistance of counsel and that the evidence was insufficient to revoke her probation.
• Plaintiff-Appellee: The specific arguments of the Plaintiff-Appellee are not detailed in the provided text, but it can be inferred that the Plaintiff-Appellee argued in favor of affirming the probation revocation.

Legal Issues

• Whether the Defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Whether the evidence was sufficient to revoke the Defendant's probation.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's orders revoking the Defendant's probation.

Reasons

• The Court, consisting of Judges Kristina Bogardus, Jennifer L. Attrep, and Jacqueline R. Medina, considered the Defendant's memorandum in opposition but remained unpersuaded by her arguments regarding ineffective assistance of counsel and the insufficiency of evidence to revoke her probation. The Court noted that the Defendant failed to assert any new facts, law, or arguments that would persuade them to alter their proposed disposition. Furthermore, issues raised in the Defendant's docketing statement that were not argued in the memorandum in opposition were deemed abandoned. The decision to affirm was based on the reasons stated in the notice of proposed disposition and the memorandum opinion (paras 1-3).