State v. Salenas
New Mexico Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MINZNER, Judge.
Defendant appeals his conviction for trafficking heroin. The second calendar notice proposed summary affirmance, and defendant responded with a timely filed memorandum in opposition. We have reviewed defendant’s memorandum in opposition and are not persuaded that the proposed disposition is incorrect. Therefore, for the reasons discussed below, wé affirm defendant’s conviction.
With respect to Issues 1 and 2, defendant has not responded to the proposed disposition of these issues in the second calendar notice. See State v. Martinez, 97 N.M. 585, 642 P.2d 188…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State v. GlossonSupreme Court of Florida · 1985
- Williams v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1985
- State v. VialpandoNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1979
- State v. SisnerosNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1982
- State v. MartinezNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1982
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Aragon v. AllstateNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2018
- State v. DavisNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2011
- State v. DyeNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2017
- Van Den Brink v. Van Den BrinkNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2011