State v. Slade
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the filing date. 1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 2 STATE OF NEW MEXICO, 3 Plaintiff-Appellee, 4 v. No. 34,128 5 BRENNAN SLADE, 6 Defendant-Appellant. 7 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF LEA COUNTY 8 Mark Terrence Sanchez, District Judge 9 10 11 12 Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General Margaret E. McLean, Assistant Attorney General Joel Jacobsen, Assistant Attorney General Santa Fe, NM 13 for Appellee 14 Jorge A. Alvarado, Chief Public Defender 15 Kathleen T. Baldridge, Assistant Appellate Defender 16 Santa Fe, NM 17 for Appellant 18 MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 BUSTAMANTE, Judge. 2 {1} Defendant appeals from the judgment and sentence setting forth his convictions 3 for the petty misdemeanor of concealing identity and for felony possession of a 4 controlled substance. [RP 99] Our second calendar notice proposed (1) to affirm 5 Defendant’s conviction for concealing identity, and (2) to reverse and remand for a 6 new trial for Defendant’s possession of a controlled substance conviction based on the 7 failure to instruct on the elements of the crime. In its response, the State provides that 8 it will not be filing a memorandum in opposition. 9 {2} For the reasons detailed in our second notice, we affirm Defendant’s conviction 10 for concealing identity, and reverse and remand for a new trial for Defendant’s 11 conviction for possession of a controlled substance. 12 {3} IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 14 15 _______________________________________ MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, Judge 16 WE CONCUR: 17 18 CYNTHIA A. FRY, Judge 19 20 J. MILES HANISEE, Judge 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
