Court Opinion

ID: 9794366
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 03:04:37.242697+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:14:55.818962
License: Public Domain

HARTZ, Judge, specially concurring. I concur in the result. Because the state clearly claimed the applicability of NMSA 1978, Section 31-21-15(C) in the district court and Defendant did not challenge its application, I would hold that Defendant did not preserve the issue raised by his appeal and we should not consider it. See State v. Thomas, 113 N.M. 298, 825 P.2d 231 (Ct.App.1991) (Hartz, J., concurring). As for the merits, I agree with the majority “that a defendant is a fugitive within the meaning of Section 31-21-15(C) if he cannot be taken into actual custody and brought before the court pursuant to the arrest warrant.” By that standard, absence from New Mexico was enough to make Defendant a fugitive. An arrest warrant issued by a New Mexico court carries no authority to seize the person named in the warrant in another state and return that person to New Mexico. See 5 Am.Jur.2d Arrest §§ 18, 20 (1962).