Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Tafoya

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided April 28, 2010No. 30,396Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMaes, Justice

{30} I agree with the majority that Anthony Tafoya (Defendant) did not waive his claim challenging the district court’s sentencing jurisdiction and, therefore, I concur in part III of the majority opinion. However, I disagree with the majority that the district court has the discretion under the Earned Meritorious Deductions Act (EMDA), NMSA 1978, Section 33-2-34 (2006), to award good time credit eligibility to serious youthful offenders convicted of first degree murder. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent from parts IV and V of the majority opinion.

{31} I begin my analysis with the EMDA,…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. State v. SmithNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2004
  2. State v. OgdenNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Torres v. StateNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1995
  4. State v. TrujilloNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Ezell v. RochaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2009

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API