Court Opinion

ID: 9954098
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-25 18:08:27.60002+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:11:50.750822
License: Public Domain

This decision of the Supreme Court of New Mexico was not selected for publication in
the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Refer to Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the
citation of unpublished decisions. Electronic decisions may contain computer-
generated errors or other deviations from the official version filed by the Supreme Court.

             IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

Filing Date: March 25, 2024

No. S-1-SC-38820

STATE OF NEW MEXICO,

       Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

JORGE REYES,

       Defendant-Appellee.

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY
Bruce C. Fox, District Judge

Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General
Charles J. Gutierrez, Assistant Attorney General
Santa Fe, NM

for Petitioner

Bennett J. Baur, Chief Public Defender
Kimberly Chavez Cook, Appellate Defender
Charles D. Agoos, Assistant Appellate Defender
Santa Fe, NM

for Respondent

                        DISPOSITIONAL ORDER OF REVERSAL

THOMSON, Justice.

{1}    WHEREAS, this matter came on for consideration upon the State’s direct appeal
under Rule 12-102(A)(3) NMRA and Rule 5-802 NMRA of the district court’s order
granting Defendant Jorge Reyes’s petition for writ of habeas corpus and concluding
that, based on State v. Sena, 2021-NMCA-047, 495 P.3d 1163, Defendant, who was
convicted of Child Solicitation by Electronic Device (CES) contrary to NMSA 1978,
Section 30-37-3.2(C)(1) (2007), was subject to the general period of parole under
NMSA 1978, Section 31-21-10(D) (2009), rather than the extended parole period under
the sex offender parole statute, NMSA 1978, Section 31-21-10.1(A) (2007) (requiring
the imposition of an indeterminate period of parole of either five to twenty years or five
years to life for those convicted of certain sex offenses);

{2}   WHEREAS, following full briefing, this Court ordered the appeal held in abeyance
pending its disposition of State v. Sena, S-1-SC-38713;

{3}   WHEREAS, this Court issued an opinion in State v. Sena, holding that
defendants convicted of CES are subject to the imposition of an indeterminate parole
sentence of five to twenty years under the sex offender parole statute, see id., 2023-
NMSC-007, ¶¶ 3-4, 25, 528 P.3d 631;

{4}   WHEREAS, herein the Court concludes that the issue of law presented in this
case was addressed by this Court’s opinion in Sena, id.;

{5}   WHEREAS, the Court exercises its discretion under Rule 12-405(B)(1) NMRA to
dispose of this case by nonprecedential order rather than a formal opinion;

{6}     WHEREAS, the Court having considered the foregoing and being otherwise
sufficiently advised;

{7}     NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the Court’s January 31, 2022, order
in this matter is VACATED as to the abeyance; and

{8}   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the district court’s April 28, 2021, order granting
Defendant’s petition for writ of habeas corpus is REVERSED, and this matter is
REMANDED to the district court for further proceedings, including the amendment of
Defendant’s parole sentence, in accordance with Sena, 2023-NMSC-007.

{9}    IT IS SO ORDERED.

DAVID K. THOMSON, Justice

WE CONCUR:

C. SHANNON BACON, Chief Justice

MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Justice

BRIANA H. ZAMORA, Justice