Legal Opinion
State v. Anaya
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided July 30, 2012No. 33,699; Docket No. 30,675PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GARCIA, Judge.
{1} Defendant Joe Anaya was convicted of driving while intoxicated (DWI), contrary to NMSA 1978, Section 66-8-102 (2007) (amended 2010), and other driving related offenses during a bench trial. At trial, the State introduced a copy of his breath alcohol test results from the Intoxilyzer 5000 breathalyzer machine (IR 5000). On appeal to this Court, Defendant asserts that the district court erred in denying his motions to suppress the IR 5000 breath test results because: (1) the Confrontation Clause mandates that Defendant have the opportunity to cross-examine a witness…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Melendez-Diaz v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bullcoming v. New MexicoSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. AnayaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2012
- State v. AbeytaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2016