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 convicted for driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. The case originated in the metropolitan court and was subsequently appealed to the district court.

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County, Charles W. Brown, District Judge: Affirmed the metropolitan court's conviction of the Defendant for driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor.

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant: The Defendant argued against the conviction, challenging it on unspecified grounds in both the docketing statement and the statement of issues filed with the district court in his on-record appeal (paras 1-2).
• Appellee: The State, represented by the Attorney General, argued in support of the conviction, although specific arguments are not detailed in the decision.

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in affirming the metropolitan court's conviction of the Defendant for driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the Defendant's convictions for driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor.

Reasons

• Per Michael D. Bustamante, J., with Michael E. Vigil, Chief Judge, and Jonathan B. Sutin, Judge, concurring: The Court of Appeals decided to affirm the Defendant's convictions, remaining unpersuaded by the Defendant's memorandum in opposition. The Defendant raised no new arguments beyond those previously made in his docketing statement and the statement of issues filed with the district court. The Court proposed to adopt the district court’s thorough and well-reasoned memorandum opinion in response to the Defendant’s arguments. The Court found that all of the Defendant's arguments had been addressed in its notice of proposed disposition and/or the district court’s memorandum opinion, which the Court proposed to adopt in its notice of proposed disposition (paras 1-3).