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 briefly lived with his sister and her three daughters, all under the age of seven. The middle child accused the Defendant of inappropriate touching, prompting the sister to contact the police. A Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE nurse) conducted an examination of the child. The Defendant was subsequently indicted on multiple charges, including criminal sexual penetration of a minor, attempted criminal sexual penetration of a minor, criminal sexual contact of a minor, contributing to the delinquency of a minor, and bribery of a witness (paras 6-7).

Procedural History

• District Court, Bernalillo County: The Defendant was convicted of one count of criminal sexual penetration of a minor, one count of attempted criminal sexual penetration of a minor, one count of criminal sexual contact of a minor, and one count of bribery of a witness.

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that (1) the prosecutor committed reversible error by questioning him about a prior juvenile adjudication of delinquency, (2) the SANE nurse’s testimony exceeded the scope of the hearsay exception for medical diagnoses, and (3) double jeopardy required the merger of his convictions for criminal sexual contact of a minor and attempted criminal sexual penetration of a minor (headnotes, paras 8, 22, 36).
• State-Appellee: Contended that the cross-examination regarding the Defendant’s prior juvenile adjudication was permissible because the Defendant opened the door to this line of questioning. The State also argued that the Defendant failed to preserve the issue regarding the SANE nurse’s testimony and conceded that double jeopardy required the merger of certain convictions (paras 8, 22, 36).

Legal Issues

• Was it reversible error for the prosecutor to cross-examine the Defendant about a prior juvenile adjudication of delinquency?
• Did the SANE nurse’s testimony exceed the scope of the hearsay exception for medical diagnoses?
• Does double jeopardy require the merger of the Defendant’s convictions for criminal sexual contact of a minor and attempted criminal sexual penetration of a minor?

Disposition

• The Court affirmed the Defendant’s convictions for criminal sexual penetration of a minor, attempted criminal sexual penetration of a minor, and bribery of a witness.
• The Court reversed the Defendant’s conviction for criminal sexual contact of a minor and remanded the case to the district court to set aside that conviction and resentence the Defendant (headnotes, para 43).

Reasons

Per Bustamante J. (Castillo and Garcia JJ. concurring):

Cross-Examination: The Court held that the prosecutor’s cross-examination regarding the Defendant’s prior juvenile adjudication was permissible. The Defendant’s testimony on direct examination opened the door to this line of questioning, and Rule 11-405(A) NMRA allows inquiry into specific instances of conduct on cross-examination. The Court distinguished this case from prior precedent where extrinsic evidence of juvenile adjudications was improperly admitted (paras 8-21).

Medical Testimony: The Court found that the Defendant failed to preserve the issue regarding the SANE nurse’s testimony. The Defendant’s objection at trial focused on the nurse’s reliance on a document not admitted into evidence, rather than the scope of the hearsay exception. The Court declined to consider the issue on appeal, as it did not involve fundamental error (paras 22-35).

Double Jeopardy: The Court agreed with the Defendant and the State that double jeopardy required the merger of the convictions for criminal sexual contact of a minor and attempted criminal sexual penetration of a minor. The Court determined that the conduct underlying these charges was unitary and that the Legislature did not intend separate punishments for these offenses. Accordingly, the Court reversed the conviction for criminal sexual contact of a minor (paras 36-43).