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 charged under New Mexico law with being a felon in possession of a firearm. The charge was based on prior convictions in Colorado for two crimes classified as misdemeanors under Colorado law, one of which carried a potential maximum sentence of one year. The Defendant was sentenced in Colorado to eighteen months of probation and a sixty-day suspended jail sentence. The issue arose as to whether the Defendant could be considered a "felon" under New Mexico law, which defines a felon as someone "convicted to a sentence of one or more years imprisonment" (paras 1, 3-4).
Procedural History
- Trial Court: Denied the Defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment, holding that the Defendant could be considered a felon under New Mexico law. The court granted an interlocutory appeal to resolve the issue (para 1).
- Court of Appeals: Reversed the trial court's decision, holding that the Defendant could not be considered a felon under New Mexico law because he was not sentenced to one or more years of imprisonment (para 1).
Parties' Submissions
- State (Plaintiff-Petitioner): Argued that the Defendant should be considered a felon under New Mexico law because the Colorado statute authorized a maximum sentence of one year for one of the Defendant's prior convictions. The State contended that the statutory definition of "felon" should be interpreted to include individuals convicted of crimes for which a sentence of one year or more is authorized, regardless of the actual sentence imposed (paras 4-5).
- Defendant (Defendant-Respondent): Argued that he could not be considered a felon under New Mexico law because he was not sentenced to one or more years of imprisonment for his prior convictions in Colorado. The Defendant emphasized that the statutory definition of "felon" requires both a conviction and a sentence of one or more years of imprisonment (paras 3-4).
Legal Issues
- Does the definition of "felon" under New Mexico's felon-in-possession statute require both a conviction and a sentence of one or more years of imprisonment, or does it include convictions for crimes where a sentence of one year or more is authorized? (paras 3-5)
Disposition
- The Supreme Court of New Mexico affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals, holding that the Defendant could not be considered a felon under New Mexico law because he was not sentenced to one or more years of imprisonment (para 1).
Reasons
Per Curiam (Serna C.J., Baca, Franchini, Minzner, and Maes JJ.):
The Court held that the specific definition of "felon" in New Mexico's felon-in-possession statute controls over the general definition of a felony in the Criminal Code. The statute explicitly requires that a person be "convicted to a sentence of one or more years imprisonment" to qualify as a felon. The Court reasoned that this language focuses on the actual sentence imposed, not the maximum sentence authorized by the statute under which the conviction occurred. The Legislature's choice of language indicated an intent to require proof of an actual sentence of one or more years, as opposed to merely the potential for such a sentence (paras 4-6).
The Court also noted that the recent amendment to the uniform jury instruction for the felon-in-possession statute, which now requires proof that a defendant was actually sentenced to one or more years of imprisonment, supports this interpretation. The amendment reflects the Legislature's intent and clarifies the statutory requirement (paras 6-7).
Because the Defendant was sentenced to probation and a suspended jail term of sixty days, he did not meet the statutory definition of a felon. Therefore, the indictment against him was properly dismissed (paras 6-7).