March 18, 2019- State of New Mexico v. Cesar Sanchez, No. A-1-CA-37709

1 	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO
2 	STATE OF NEW MEXICO,
3 	Plaintiff-Appellee,
4 	V . 	NO. A-1-CA-37709
5 CESAR SANCHEZ,
6 	Defendant-Appellant.
7 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF CURRY COUNTY
8 Matthew E. Chandler, District Judge
9 Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General
10 	Santa Fe , NM
11 	for Appellee
12 Bennett J. Baur, Chief Public Defender
13 	Kathleen T. Baldridge, Assistant Appellate Defender
14 	Santa Fe , NM
15 	for Appellant
16 	MEMORANDUM OPINION
17 	VANZI, Judge.
18 	{ t} 	Defendant appeals following the revocation of his probation. We previously
19 	issued a notice of proposed summary disposition, proposing to affirm. Defendant has
20 	filed a memorandum in opposition. After due consideration, we remain unpersuaded
21 	by the assertion of error. We therefore affirm.
Court of Appeals of New Mexico
Filed 3/18/2019 10:17 AM
Mark Reynolds

1 {2} 	In his memorandum in opposition Defendant renews his challenge to the
2 sufficiency of the evidence to establish that he violated the terms and conditions of
3 probation. [DS 5; MIO 3] However, as described at greater length in the notice of
4 proposed summary disposition, [CN 2-3] the State presented eyewitness testimony
5 establishing that Defendant violated the first standard condition of his probation by
6 committing one or more criminal offenses-namely, assault, battery, and/or robbery.
7 [RP 	104-06] Defendant does not controvert this; instead, he contends that the
8 evidence should be deemed insufficient because the State failed to establish that he
9 committed either battery on a household member or false imprisonment. [MIO 1, 4-6]
10 	Assuming that this is so, it does not alter our analysis or require a different result.
11 	Although battery on a household member and false imprisonment were charged in a
12 	separately 	filed 	criminal 	action, 	[RP 	78-80] 	the 	detailed 	petition 	to 	revoke
13 	Defendant's probation described a course of conduct that was also consistent with
14 assault, battery, and robbery. [RP 75-81] And as previously stated, the eyewitness
15 	testimony presented at the hearing on the petition was sufficient to establish, with
16 	reasonable certainty, that Defendant committed one or more of those offenses. [CN
17 	2-3; RP 104-06] See generally State v. Leon, 2013-NMCA-011, ~ 36,292 P.3d 493
18 	(explaining that the state bears the burden of establishing a probation violation with
19 reasonable certainty); In re Bruno R., 2003-NMCA-057, ~ 9, 133 N.M. 566, 66 P.3d
2

1 339 (stating that we indulge all reasonable inferences to uphold a finding that there
2 	was sufficient evidence of a probation violation). This is sufficient to support the
3 	revocation of Defendant's probation. See Leon, 2013-NMCA-011, ~ 37 ("[I]fthere
4 	is sufficient evidence to support just one violation, we will find the district court's
5 	[probation revocation] order was proper.").
6 	{3} 	Accordingly, 	for 	the reasons 	stated in the 	notice 	of proposed 	summary
7 disposition and above, we affirm.
8 {4}
9
10
IT IS SO ORDERED.
11 	WE CONCUR:
~	LIND~
3