Court of Appeals of New Mexico
Decision Information
Rule Set 12 - Rules of Appellate Procedure - cited by 9,882 documents
Decision Content
STATE V. BACA
This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the filing date.
STATE OF NEW MEXICO,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ANTHONY BACA,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. A-1-CA-36262
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO
October 18, 2018
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF CURRY COUNTY, Fred T.
Van Soelen, District Judge
COUNSEL
Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General, Santa Fe, NM, for Appellee
Bennett J. Baur, Chief Public Defender, Caitlin C.M. Smith, Assistant Appellate Defender, Santa Fe, NM, for Appellant
JUDGES
J. MILES HANISEE, Judge. WE CONCUR: JULIE J. VARGAS, Judge, DANIEL J. GALLEGOS, Judge
MEMORANDUM OPINION
HANISEE, Judge.
{1} Defendant Anthony Baca appeals from his conviction of aggravated assault. This Court issued a notice of proposed disposition, proposing to summarily affirm, and a second notice of proposed disposition, proposing to summarily affirm, in part, and reverse, in part. Defendant filed a memorandum in support of summary reversal and opposition to summary affirmance (DMIO), stating that he “relies upon the facts and arguments contained in his initial memorandum in opposition to proposed summary affirmance,” and supports our proposed reversal in part. [DMIO 1] The State also filed a response to our proposed disposition (SMIO), by which it “informs the Court that after due consideration it will not be filing a memorandum in opposition.” [SMIO 1] Accordingly, and for the reasons stated in our notice of proposed disposition, as remain applicable, and our second notice of proposed disposition, we affirm Defendant’s conviction of aggravated assault, but reverse the district court’s designation of the conviction as a serious violent offense.
{2} IT IS SO ORDERED.
J. MILES HANISEE, Judge
WE CONCUR:
JULIE J. VARGAS, Judge
DANIEL J. GALLEGOS, Judge