State v. Devara

This decision of the Supreme Court of New Mexico was not selected for publication in
the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Refer to Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the
citation of unpublished decisions. Electronic decisions may contain computer-
generated errors or other deviations from the official version filed by the Supreme Court.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

Filing Date: November 29, 2021

No. S-1-SC-38855

STATE OF NEW MEXICO,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

RICKY DEVARA,

Defendant-Appellant.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING ON CERTIORARI
James Waylon Counts, District Judge

Bennett J. Baur, Chief Public Defender
Kimberly M. Chavez Cook, Appellate Defender
Carrie Cochran, Assistant Appellate Defender
Santa Fe, NM

for Defendant-Appellant

Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General
John Kloss, Assistant Attorney General
Santa Fe, NM

for Plaintiff-Appellee

DISPOSITIONAL ORDER OF REVERSAL

THOMSON, Justice.

{1} WHEREAS, this matter came before the Court upon Defendant Ricky Devara’s
petition for writ of certiorari filed pursuant to Rule 12-502 NMRA requesting that this
Court reverse the Court of Appeals’ memorandum opinion, which concluded that under
State v. Torrez, 2013-NMSC-034, ¶ 10, 305 P.3d 944, and Rule 5-701(A) NMRA, the
district court did not have the authority to determine the evidence supporting
Defendant’s conviction for driving while intoxicated was legally insufficient. State v.
Devara, A-1-CA-38922, mem. op. ¶¶ 2, 4 (N.M. Ct. App. May 13, 2021);

{2} WHEREAS, Defendant notified this Court that State v. Martinez, S-1-SC-37938,
raised the same legal issue and was argued on May 5, 2021. See Rule 12-202(G)
NMRA (“A party has a continuing obligation to alert the appellate court to any related
appeals that come to the party’s attention.”);

{3} WHEREAS, this Court issued an opinion in State v. Martinez, 2021-NMSC-___,
___ P.3d ___ (S-1-SC-37938, Nov. 1, 2021);

{4} WHEREAS, the Court concludes that the issue of law presented in this case was
addressed by the Court’s opinion in Martinez, id.; and

{5} WHEREAS, the Court exercises its discretion under Rule 12-405(B)(1) NMRA to
dispose of this case by nonprecedential order rather than a formal opinion;

{6} NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the memorandum opinion of the
Court of Appeals is reversed, and the matter is remanded to the Court of Appeals for
further proceedings in accordance with Martinez, 2021-NMSC-___.

{7} IT IS SO ORDERED.

MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Chief Justice

C. SHANNON BACON, Justice

DAVID K. THOMSON, Justice

JULIE J. VARGAS, Justice