Court Opinion

ID: 9563387
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 18:39:15.315796+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:49.375629
License: Public Domain

SUTIN, Judge (dissenting). The reason I dissent is that Bachicha should be discharged because § 64 — 9-4(a), N.M.S.A.1953 (2nd Repl.Vol. 9, pt. 2) is unconstitutional. See Dissent in State v. Sanchez, 82 N.M. 585, 484 P.2d 1295 (Ct. App.1971); State v. Sluder, 82 N.M. 755, 487 P.2d 183 (Ct.App.1971). This continuing problem would terminate if the state would seek a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court on the issue of a new trial. I raise this question sua sponte. Tate, Sua Sponte Consideration on Appeal, 9 Trial Lawyers Journal (July, 1970). It is my belief that the Supreme Court will do the same. This is the third case on appeal in which the constitutionality of the statute has been raised sua sponte. Yet, the parties have not sought finality. It is regrettable if the statute is held unconstitutional that persons charged with this statutory violation spent time in prison.