Supreme Court of New Mexico
Decision Information
Chapter 66 - Motor Vehicles - cited by 3,081 documents
Rule Set 12 - Rules of Appellate Procedure - cited by 9,882 documents
Citations - New Mexico Appellate Reports
State v. Adams - cited by 23 documents
State v. Adams - cited by 25 documents
Decision Content
This decision of the Supreme Court of New Mexico was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Refer to Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished decisions. Electronic decisions may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official version filed by the Supreme Court.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO
Filing Date: May 26, 2022
No. S-1-SC-37719
STATE OF NEW MEXICO,
Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
EUGENE GARCIA,
Defendant-Petitioner.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING ON CERTIORARI
Karen L. Townsend, District Judge
Bennett J. Baur, Chief Public Defender
Caitlin C.M. Smith, Assistant Appellate Defender
Santa Fe, NM
for Petitioner
Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General
John Kloss, Assistant Attorney General
Santa Fe, NM
for Respondent
DISPOSITIONAL ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE
VIGIL, Chief Justice.
{1} WHEREAS, the Court granted Defendant Eugene Garcia’s petition for writ of certiorari to review the Court of Appeals determination that the district court erred in ruling that the blood test results at issue were inadmissible because the district court misapprehended State v. Adams, 2019-NMCA-043, 447 P.3d 1142 and NMSA 1978, Section 66-8-103 (1978); and
{2} WHEREAS, the Court ordered that this case be held in abeyance pending the Court’s disposition of State v. Adams, 2022-NMSC-008, 503 P.3d 1130; and
{3} WHEREAS, this Court issued an opinion in Adams, id.; and
{4} WHEREAS, the Court concludes that the issue of law presented in this case was addressed by the Court’s opinion in Adams, id.; and
{5} WHEREAS, the Court exercises its discretion under Rule 12-405(B)(1) NMRA to dispose of this case by nonprecedential order rather than a formal opinion;
{6} NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the memorandum opinion of the Court of Appeals is affirmed, and the matter is remanded to the district court for further proceedings in accordance with Adams, 2022-NMSC-008.
{7} IT IS SO ORDERED.
MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Chief Justice
C. SHANNON BACON, Justice
DAVID K. THOMSON, Justice
JULIE J. VARGAS, Justice
BRIANA H. ZAMORA, Justice, not participating