10 results for 'judge:"Yohalem"'.
J. Yohalem finds the trial court erroneously granted defendant's motion to enforce a plea agreement revoked by the state on the eve of trial. Even though the state's actions caused a delay of several months, defendant was not prejudiced by the delay and the court could not apply the "detrimental reliance" exception. Reversed.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Yohalem, Filed On: May 14, 2024, Case #: A-1-CA-40501, Categories: Criminal Procedure, Plea
J. Yohalem finds the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to dismiss an entire jury panel during voir dire. Although statements about a criminal defendant's guilt made by a potential juror showed bias, they did not pertain to any specific facts about defendant, while the trial court also questioned the remaining jurors about whether the comments would impact their ability to remain impartial. Meanwhile, defendant's convictions for battery by strangulation and false imprisonment did not violate his double jeopardy rights. The victim was choked and restrained initially, before defendant took her phone for a 10-minute period and refused to allow her to leave the room; therefore, there was separate evidence to support each conviction. Affirmed.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Yohalem, Filed On: April 29, 2024, Case #: A-1-CA-40425, Categories: Jury, Double Jeopardy, Battery
J. Yohalem finds the trial court improperly refused to hear and summarily denied defendant's motion to dismiss drug charges on speedy trial grounds. Although the motion was filed on the eve of trial, the court had not imposed a scheduling order on the parties and filings regarding the constitutional rights of a criminal defendant must be heard absent intentional misconduct; therefore, the case will be remanded to allow the trial court to consider the merits of the motion. Reversed.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Yohalem, Filed On: February 27, 2024, Case #: A-1-CA-40312, Categories: Criminal Procedure, Speedy Trial
[Consolidated.] J. Yohalem finds the lower court erroneously affirmed the removal of the Native American child from his guardians because the government failed to provide sufficient evidence of its efforts to prevent the unnecessary removal of the child as required under the Indian Child Welfare Act. The only evidence from the state agency came from a single witness who testified the agency made numerous phone calls to the guardians over a 9-month period, while the agency also failed to conduct in-home studies of the child's grandparents and birth parents to determine if they were suitable placements. Reversed.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Yohalem, Filed On: December 20, 2023, Case #: A-1-CA-40390, Categories: Evidence, Family Law, Native Americans
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Yohalem finds the workers' compensation judge properly denied the injured employee's request for benefits under two sections of the Workers' Compensation Act. An injury to the upper part of an ankle provides for workers' compensation benefits under only the "one foot at the ankle" subsection, not the "leg between the knee and ankle" subsection. The plain language of the statute intends for "at the ankle" to include the entire joint, regardless of whether portions of the upper ankle are connected to the lower leg; therefore, the worker is entitled to only 115 weeks of benefits. Affirmed.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Yohalem, Filed On: November 30, 2023, Case #: A-1-CA-40077, Categories: Employment, Workers' Compensation
J. Yohalem finds the lower court properly granted the New Mexico Educational Retirement Board's motion for declaratory judgment in its challenge to the Department of Finance and Administration's rejection of salary increases for board employees that had already been approved by the board. The authority to approve pay raises for board members lies solely with the board and, therefore, the department cannot reject pay raises it deems too high. Although the department is tasked with disbursement of the salaries, that ministerial role is its only function under the legislation that established and funds the board. Affirmed.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Yohalem, Filed On: October 30, 2023, Case #: A-1-CA-40106, Categories: Education, Employment, Government
J. Yohalem finds the lower court erroneously granted the bidder's request for a writ of mandamus to compel delivery of a tax deed from the Department of Taxation and Revenue because the auction resulting in the sale of a parcel of land was not conducted in accordance with tax code regulations and, therefore, was invalid. The auction committee's incorrect announcement that taxes on the parcel had been paid shortly before the start of the auction caused several potential buyers to leave, and its decision to reinstate the parcel to the auction list immediately before the auction commenced did not comply with the relevant rules of procedure. Reversed.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Yohalem, Filed On: October 5, 2023, Case #: A-1-CA-39582, Categories: Government, Real Estate, Tax
J. Yohalem finds a lower court partially erred in convicting defendant of battery upon a police officer and other charges. While defendant is right that his convictions for both "resisting, evading or obstructing an officer" and "aggravated fleeing a police officer" violate principles of double jeopardy because one is a "lesser" offense that is "subsumed" by the other, his double-jeopardy arguments otherwise fail because his conduct was not "unitary." For example, his charges for both battery and assault on a police officer did not violate double jeopardy because they referred to different offenses by him. Reversed in part.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Yohalem, Filed On: July 25, 2023, Case #: A-1-CA-39807, Categories: Double Jeopardy, Obstruction, Battery
J. Yohalem finds a lower tax hearing officer ruled correctly in favor of UPS in a dispute with tax authorities over taxes allegedly owed. UPS presented “clear and cogent evidence” that a “special mileage formula” used by state tax authorities to evaluate taxes owed by multistate trucking companies “resulted in gross distortion” of UPS’s “actual business activities in New Mexico” and violated the commerce clause of the Constitution. Therefore, UPS was entitled to a reassessment of monies owed. Affirmed.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Yohalem, Filed On: June 22, 2023, Case #: A-1-CA-38585, Categories: Administrative Law, Government, Tax