Opinion
NO. 33,546
03-11-2015
STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DORA DAVENPORT, Defendant-Appellant.
Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General Margaret McLean, Assistant Attorney General Santa Fe, NM for Appellee Jorge A. Alvarado, Chief Public Defender Sergio Viscoli, Appellate Public Defender Santa Fe, 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 Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions.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
Kenneth H. Martinez, District Judge
Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General
Margaret McLean, Assistant Attorney General
Santa Fe, NM
for Appellee Jorge A. Alvarado, Chief Public Defender
Sergio Viscoli, Appellate Public Defender
Santa Fe, NM
for Appellant
MEMORANDUM OPINION
HANISEE, Judge. {1} Defendant appeals from the district court's order denying her motion to dismiss the charge of commercial burglary. Defendant entered a conditional plea reserving for appeal the issues raised in her motion to dismiss. On the basis of this Court's opinion in State v. Archuleta, ___-NMCA-___, ___ P.3d ___ (No. 32,794, Oct. 27, 2014), cert. granted, 2015-NMCERT-___ (No. 35,005, Jan. 26, 2015), we issued a notice of proposed summary disposition, proposing to reverse. The State has responded with an objection to our notice and a request to hold this appeal in abeyance or provide the State with a reasonable opportunity to seek guidance from the New Mexico Supreme Court on all pending appeals controlled by our opinion in Archuleta. [MIO 1-2] We have provided the State with such an opportunity, and the Supreme Court has denied the State a stay or other remedy that would suspend the precedential value of Archuleta. Thus, pursuant to Rule 12-405(C) NMRA, we apply Archuleta. See Rule 12-405(C) ("A petition for a writ of certiorari filed pursuant to Rule 12-502 NMRA or a Supreme Court order granting the petition does not affect the precedential value of an opinion of the Court of Appeals, unless otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court."). {2} In its response to our notice, the State simply objects to our proposed disposition without elaboration. [MIO 1, 3] We continue to believe that there are no material factual distinctions to remove this case from the control of our opinion in Archuleta. For the reasons stated in our notice, we reverse Defendant's conviction for commercial burglary. {3} IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ _________
J. MILES HANISEE, Judge
WE CONCUR:
/s/ _________
MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, Judge
/s/ _________
JONATHAN B. SUTIN, Judge