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 convicted of intimidation of a witness and resisting or obstructing an officer. The case involves a dispute over restitution payments to the Victim, specifically regarding the Defendant's obligation to reimburse the Victim for three months of property occupancy. The manner of payment for restitution was not specified in the judgment, leading to further proceedings.
Procedural History
- District Court of Santa Fe County: The Defendant was convicted of intimidation of a witness and resisting or obstructing an officer. The judgment included an order for restitution but did not specify the manner of payment.
Parties' Submissions
- Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the judgment lacked finality due to the absence of a restitution plan and requested the appellate court to order the lower court to explicitly state the basis for requiring restitution payments to the Victim. The Defendant also questioned the rationale for reimbursing the Victim for three months of property occupancy.
- Plaintiff-Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]
Legal Issues
- Whether the judgment was final despite the absence of a specified restitution plan.
- Whether the Defendant could challenge the basis for the restitution payments to the Victim.
Disposition
- The appeal was dismissed for lack of finality, and the case was remanded to the lower court for further proceedings.
Reasons
Per Sutin J. (Fry C.J. and Wechsler J. concurring):
The Court held that the judgment was not final because it did not specify the manner in which restitution was to be paid, leaving the preparation of a restitution plan to be determined later. This lack of finality was consistent with precedent in State v. Candy L., where a similar situation involving a restitution plan was deemed unresolved. The Court emphasized the need to avoid piecemeal appeals and concluded that the Defendant could raise objections to the restitution plan and its basis during the remand proceedings.