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The Defendant's probation was revoked after a probation officer discovered a bottle labeled as whiskey during a home visit. The Defendant claimed the bottle contained iced tea, not alcohol, which would have violated his probation conditions. The officer did not test the contents of the bottle. Additionally, the Defendant had previously served in the National Guard under the presiding judge but did not raise concerns about recusal until after the probation revocation hearing.
Procedural History
- Magistrate Court: Ordered the Defendant to serve the remainder of his sentence in either the Eddy County Detention Center or the New Mexico Department of Corrections.
- District Court: Modified the sentence, requiring the Defendant to serve 364 days in the Eddy County Detention Center, with the remainder of the sentence suspended.
Parties' Submissions
- Appellant (Defendant): Argued that the presiding judge should have recused himself due to prior National Guard service under the judge, that the calculation of the remaining sentence was incorrect, that it was improper to serve time in the Department of Corrections for misdemeanor charges, and that there was insufficient evidence to prove a probation violation.
- Respondent (State): Contended that the Defendant failed to preserve the recusal and sentence calculation issues for appeal, that the place of imprisonment was appropriate under New Mexico law, and that sufficient evidence supported the probation violation.
Legal Issues
- Should the presiding judge have recused himself due to prior National Guard service under him?
- Was the calculation of the Defendant's remaining sentence accurate?
- Was it improper to require the Defendant to serve time in the Department of Corrections for misdemeanor charges?
- Was there sufficient evidence to support the finding of a probation violation?
Disposition
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision to revoke the Defendant's probation.
Reasons
Per Wechsler J. (Robles and Garcia JJ. concurring):
Recusal of Judge: The Defendant failed to preserve the issue of recusal for appeal, as he did not object before or during the hearing. The Court noted that the Defendant had ample opportunity to raise the issue earlier and found no evidence of bias or prejudice from the judge.
Calculation of Remaining Sentence: The Defendant did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate an error in the calculation of his remaining sentence. The Court emphasized the presumption of correctness in the district court's rulings and the Defendant's burden to show error, which he failed to meet.
Place of Imprisonment: The Court deemed the issue moot, as the Defendant was no longer incarcerated in a state correctional facility. The Court also found that the place of imprisonment complied with New Mexico law, which allows for discretion in sentencing based on the length of imprisonment and suspension of the sentence.
Sufficiency of Evidence: The Court found sufficient evidence to support the probation violation. While the Defendant claimed the bottle contained iced tea, the district court was entitled to reject his testimony as improbable and accept the probation officer's inference that the bottle contained alcohol. The standard for proving a probation violation is lower than beyond a reasonable doubt, and the evidence met this standard.