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 was on probation when the State sought to revoke it. The revocation was based on allegations that the Defendant violated the terms of his probation. The case also involved the enhancement of the Defendant's sentence under NMSA 1978, Section 31-18-17 (2003).

Procedural History

• District Court, Doña Ana County, Lisa C. Schultz, District Judge: The Defendant's probation was revoked, and his sentence was enhanced under NMSA 1978, Section 31-18-17 (2003).

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant (Defendant): Argued that the evidence presented was insufficient to support the enhancement of his sentence under NMSA 1978, Section 31-18-17 (2003).
• Appellee (State): Did not oppose the appellate court's proposal to reverse the sentence enhancement and remand the case for resentencing due to insufficient evidence presented in the lower court.

Legal Issues

• Was there sufficient evidence to support the enhancement of the Defendant's sentence under NMSA 1978, Section 31-18-17 (2003)?

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals reversed the sentence enhancement and remanded the case for resentencing.

Reasons

Per Bustamante J. (Kennedy and Vanzi JJ. concurring):

The Court found that the evidence presented in the lower court was insufficient to support the enhancement of the Defendant's sentence under NMSA 1978, Section 31-18-17 (2003). The State did not oppose the appellate court's proposed disposition to reverse the enhancement and remand the case for resentencing. Consequently, the Court reversed the sentence enhancement and remanded the case for further proceedings.