Opinion
NO. 34,340
04-23-2015
STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DIANE BACA, Defendant-Appellant.
Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General Santa Fe, NM for Appellee Jorge A. Alvarado, Chief Public Defender Vicki W. Zelle, Assistant Appellate Public Defender Albuquerque, NM for Appellant
This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the filing date. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY
Jacqueline Flores, District Judge
Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General
Santa Fe, NM
for Appellee Jorge A. Alvarado, Chief Public Defender
Vicki W. Zelle, Assistant Appellate Public Defender
Albuquerque, NM
for Appellant
MEMORANDUM OPINION
WECHSLER, Judge. {1} Defendant has appealed from a conviction for DWI. We previously issued a notice of proposed summary disposition in which we proposed to uphold Defendant's conviction. Defendant has filed a memorandum in opposition. After due consideration, we remain unpersuaded. We therefore affirm. {2} Defendant has raised a single issue, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to establish that she was driving. [DS 10] As we previously observed in the notice of proposed summary disposition, the State presented evidence that Defendant repeatedly admitted that she had been driving. [DS 2-5, MIO 2] This is sufficient to support the factfinder's determination. See, e.g., State v. Orquiz, 2012-NMCA-080, ¶ 4, 284 P.3d 418 (observing that although no witnesses testified to seeing the defendant driving, his admission at the scene was sufficient for a jury to infer that he actually drove). {3} In her memorandum in opposition, Defendant focuses on the countervailing evidence, including the "physical evidence" (i.e., the position of the driver's seat), [MIO 10] in support of her continuing assertion that the verdict is unsupported by the weight of the evidence. [MIO 9-11] However, insofar as we cannot re-weigh the evidence, Defendant's argument does not supply a basis for reversal. See, e.g., State v. Owelicio, 2011-NMCA-091, ¶ 34, 150 N.M. 528, 263 P.3d 305 (observing, in a similar case, that "[a]lthough there was other evidence and testimony indicating that [the d]efendant was not the driver, the factfinder [was] entitled to weigh these inconsistencies against [the d]efendant's admission and the evidence suggesting she was driving[,]" and that on appeal this Court "will not disturb the factfinder's determinations" on such matters). We therefore reject Defendant's assertion of error. {4} Accordingly, for the reasons stated in our notice of proposed summary disposition and above, we affirm. {5} IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ _________
JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge
WE CONCUR:
/s/ _________
TIMOTHY L. GARCIA, Judge
/s/ _________
M. MONICA ZAMORA, Judge