holding that the defendant did not separately possess two stashes of methamphetamine because "it [was] obvious that the methamphetamine Defendant possessed at the hospital came from her home" and there was no evidence to indicate that she had a separate intent with respect to each stash
Summary of this case from State v. QuickNo. 30,765.
December 19, 2007.
(COA 27,416). PETITIONS FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI DENIED.
holding that the defendant did not separately possess two stashes of methamphetamine because "it [was] obvious that the methamphetamine Defendant possessed at the hospital came from her home" and there was no evidence to indicate that she had a separate intent with respect to each stash
Summary of this case from State v. QuickFull title:STATE v. DURAN
Court:Supreme Court of New Mexico
Date published: Dec 19, 2007
{10} Defendant argues that in this case, unlike Contreras, the State is unable to distinguish between the…
State v. Payne930 A.2d at 1163. A similar result was reached in State v. Ortega, 143 N.M. 261, 175 P.3d 929 (N.M.App. 2007)…