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 arrested without a warrant for the criminal sexual penetration of a minor (CSPM) after a police officer received a report from the victim's brother, who claimed to have witnessed the Defendant committing the act. The Defendant later admitted to the act during a post-arrest interview. The Defendant was indicted on three counts of CSPM but was acquitted on two counts, with a mistrial declared on the remaining count. A re-trial resulted in a conviction on the remaining count (paras 1-3).

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County, Judith K. Nakamura, District Judge: Convicted the Defendant of one count of CSPM (child under thirteen) (para 1).
• Court of Appeals of New Mexico: Reversed the conviction and remanded the matter for further proceedings and retrial (para 39).

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellee (State of New Mexico): Argued that the Defendant's warrantless arrest was supported by probable cause and exigent circumstances, and that the delay between the arrest and trial did not violate the Defendant's right to a speedy trial (paras 4, 18).
• Defendant-Appellant (Pedro Calvillo): Contended that his warrantless arrest was unconstitutional due to lack of exigency, his post-arrest statement was involuntary and should have been suppressed, and the delay between his arrest and trial violated his right to a speedy trial (paras 4, 18).

Legal Issues

• Whether the Defendant's warrantless arrest was unconstitutional due to lack of exigency under Article II, Section 10 of the New Mexico Constitution (para 4).
• Whether the forty-seven-month delay between the Defendant's arrest and trial violated his right to a speedy trial (para 4).
• Whether the Defendant's post-arrest statement was involuntary and should have been suppressed (para 4).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals reversed the Defendant's conviction and remanded the case for further proceedings and retrial (para 39).

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, with Judge Timothy L. Garcia authoring the opinion, found that the Defendant's warrantless arrest was conducted without the requisite exigency required by Article II, Section 10 of the New Mexico Constitution, making the arrest unconstitutional. Consequently, the Defendant's post-arrest statement should have been suppressed. The Court did not need to address the argument regarding the voluntariness of the Defendant's statement due to this finding. Regarding the speedy trial claim, the Court concluded that the Defendant did not suffer undue prejudice from the delay, which was largely caused or stipulated to by the Defendant, and therefore, there was no violation of his right to a speedy trial. The Court also found that there was sufficient evidence presented at the first trial to justify a retrial on the CSPM charge (paras 4-38).