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 criminal solicitation to commit bribery of a witness. The case involved the Defendant soliciting his wife to commit bribery of a witness, an act completed during a phone call with her.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant (Defendant): Argued that the district court erred in excluding a letter he wrote to his wife showing remorse for the solicitation, which should have been admitted under the residual exception to the hearsay rule (para 3-4).
• Appellee (State of New Mexico): [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in excluding a letter written by the Defendant to his wife from evidence.
• Whether the Defendant established prejudice from the exclusion of the letter.

Disposition

• The appeal was affirmed, maintaining the conviction of the Defendant for criminal solicitation to commit bribery of a witness (para 5).

Reasons

• KRISTINA BOGARDUS, Judge, with J. MILES HANISEE, Judge, and GERALD E. BACA, Judge, concurring:
  The court found that the Defendant's memorandum in opposition did not raise any new arguments on several issues, deeming them abandoned (para 2). Regarding the exclusion of the letter, the court held it constituted hearsay and, in any event, the Defendant had not been prejudiced by its exclusion as the district court had ultimately admitted the letter into evidence. The Defendant's claim that the letter could come in under the residual exception to the hearsay rule was rejected because the requirements for this exception were not met, and the letter was deemed irrelevant since the crime of solicitation was complete at the time of the Defendant's phone call with his wife. The court concluded that the Defendant had not established that any error occurred or that he was prejudiced by the error, affirming the conviction (paras 3-4).