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, Isaac Marquez, was indicted on four counts of Criminal Sexual Penetration of a Minor (CSPM) based on allegations made by J.K., his wife's granddaughter, who lived with them sporadically between the ages of six and eight. J.K. disclosed years later that during her stay, the Defendant had inappropriately touched her and made her touch him. The charges arose from a specific pattern of misconduct where the Defendant allegedly digitally penetrated J.K. during the night. Other alleged acts of sexual misconduct by the Defendant towards J.K., including exposure and coerced touching, were not charged due to the statute of limitations (paras 2-3).

Procedural History

• District Court: Admitted evidence of prior, uncharged acts under the lewd and lascivious exception, leading to the Defendant's conviction on one count of CSPM (paras 4-9).
• Court of Appeals: Reversed the district court's decision, holding that the lewd and lascivious disposition exception to the prohibition against propensity evidence is abolished in New Mexico and that the error in admitting the evidence of prior, uncharged acts was not harmless (para 10-12).

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Petitioner (State): Argued that evidence of prior, uncharged acts of sexual misconduct against J.K. was admissible to show an ongoing pattern of abuse and was part of the same course of conduct (paras 5-6).
• Defendant-Respondent: Contended that the evidence at issue was purely propensity evidence and should not be admitted (para 6).

Legal Issues

• Whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that the evidence of prior, uncharged acts was inadmissible under the lewd and lascivious disposition exception to provide context to the victim’s allegations or to rebut Defendant’s claim of fabrication.
• Whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that the evidence was inadmissible to prove unlawfulness or intent (para 13).

Disposition

• The Supreme Court of the State of New Mexico vacated the Defendant’s convictions and remanded the matter to the district court for a new trial, holding that the lewd and lascivious disposition exception to Rule 11-404(B)(1) has been abrogated in New Mexico (para 37).

Reasons

• The Supreme Court, per Chief Justice Bacon, concluded that the common-law lewd and lascivious disposition exception to Rule 11-404(B)(1)’s prohibition on the admission of other bad acts evidence is abrogated in New Mexico. The Court clarified that evidence offered to show a particular disposition toward an alleged victim is propensity evidence and may not be introduced against a defendant unless it is admissible for a nonpropensity purpose as prescribed by Rule 11-404(B)(2). The Court disagreed with the State's contention that the Court of Appeals' rejection of the lewd and lascivious disposition exception was erroneous, affirming the appellate court's determination that the trial court erred in admitting the uncharged misconduct evidence under that exception. The Court also addressed the State's request to conclude that the evidence was otherwise admissible under Rule 11-404(B)(2) for a nonpropensity purpose, deciding that it would be unfair to Defendant to affirm the district court's decision on these grounds without proper notice and opportunity for Defendant to respond (paras 14-36).