N.M. R. Crim. P. Metro. Ct. 7-611.1

As amended through August 23, 2024

Rule 7-611.1 - Judicial acquittal notwithstanding guilty verdict in on-record cases

A. Motion. In cases which may be appealed on the record, if the defendant has been found guilty, the court on motion of the defendant, or on its own motion, may enter judgment of acquittal if the court finds the evidence insufficient to sustain a guilty verdict.

B. Time for making motion for acquittal. A defendant may move for a judgment of acquittal, or renew such a motion, within fourteen (14) days after the jury returns a guilty verdict or after the court discharges the jury, whichever is later.

C. Procedure; hearing. When the defendant has been found guilty by a jury or by the court, a motion for acquittal may be dictated into the record and may be argued immediately after the return of the verdict. That motion may be in writing and filed with the clerk. That motion, written or oral, shall fully set forth the grounds on which it is based.

D. Waiver. Failure to make a motion for acquittal shall not constitute a waiver of any error which has been properly brought to the attention of the court.

N.M. R. Crim. P. Metro. Ct. 7-611.1

Adopted by Supreme Court Order No. S-1-RCR-2023-00020, effective for all cases pending or filed on or after 12/31/2023.

Committee commentary. - In cases which may be appealed on the record, the metropolitan court has "inherent authority to determine whether the evidence presented at trial was legally insufficient to support a conviction." See State v. Martinez, 2022-NMSC-004, ¶¶ 1, 4, 26, 503 P.3d 313. When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence after the return of a guilty verdict, the metropolitan court shall use the same standard employed by appellate courts in assessing whether sufficient evidence supports a conviction. Id. ¶ 12. That standard is as follows: "In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, [the metropolitan court] must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the guilty verdict, indulging all reasonable inferences and resolving all conflicts in the evidence in favor of the verdict. Contrary evidence supporting acquittal does not provide a basis for reversal because the jury is free to reject [the d]efendant's version of the facts. The relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. Galindo, 2018-NMSC-021, ¶ 12, 415 P.3d 494 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).

In on-record cases when a defendant is charged with multiple offenses and the jury returns a guilty verdict on more than one charge, the metropolitan court may acquit the defendant on one of the charges while also entering judgment and sentencing the defendant on the remaining charge or charges that are supported by the jury's guilty verdict. In a case like that, for purposes of creating a clear record on appeal, the metropolitan court shall issue one final order containing both the judgment and sentence for the convictions that were supported by sufficient evidence, as well as the judicial acquittal on the unsupported guilty verdicts.

[Adopted by Supreme Court Order No. S-1-RCR-2023-00020, effective for all cases pending or filed on or after December 31, 2023.]