Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Pickett

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided May 11, 2009No. 27,938Published

1DissentVigil, Judge

{25} The majority does not take into account that the crime of DWI can be committed in different ways under Section 66-8-102, and that each has different, discrete elements. When these differences are taken into account, it is apparent that reversible error was committed by the metropolitan court judge. Since the majority disagrees, I dissent.

{26} Section 66-8-102(0(1) describes one way to commit the crime. In 2006, when the complaint against Defendant was filed, this subsection in pertinent part provided: “It is unlawful for a person who has an alcohol concentration of eight one hundredths…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. MontoyaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2005
  2. State v. BaldwinNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2001
  3. State v. HarrisonNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1992
  4. State v. DayNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2008
  5. State v. GutierrezNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1995

1 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