 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Sims v. Ryan6/15/1998
CERTIFICATION FROM THE NEW MEXICO COURT OF APPEALS Robert E. Robles, District Judge
{1} On certification from the Court of Appeals, this Court considers the Honorable Mark Sims' (Judge Sims) appeal of the district court's denial of his Petition for Writ of Superintending Control. NMSA 1978, 34-5-14 (C) (1972). Judge Sims petitioned for a writ to prohibit the Honorable Judge Stephen Ryan (Judge Ryan), Presiding Judge of the Las Cruces Municipal Court, from sentencing, or voiding the sentences of defendants who appeared before Judge Sims or any other municipal court Judge. We granted certiorari to consider the proper exercise of superintending control over lower courts. We reverse and remand the district court's decision.
I.
{2} On August 28, 1995, Judge Sims accepted two Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) offenders' guilty pleas and sentenced the offenders after evaluating them from the bench. (R.P. 6). Thereafter, Judge Ryan, Presiding Judge of the Las Cruces Municipal Court, voided Judge Sims' sentencing on the same day, writing on the Disposition document "Void - Judge Sims not authorized to impose sentence" and "Void - Judge Sims not authorized to sentence on DWI." Id. As Presiding Judge, Judge Ryan had an unwritten policy of requiring pre-sentence evaluations of all DWI or domestic violence offenders and conducting a weekly sentencing session. In practice, Judge Ryan personally sentenced all DWI and domestic violence offenders while the other Judges sentenced remaining code violations.
II.
{3} This Court denied Judge Sims' first Petition for Writ of Superintending Control without prejudice. Judge Sims then filed a Petition for Writ of Superintending Control with the Third Judicial District Court which the district court also denied. The district court stated that local ordinance authorizes the Presiding Judge to establish judicial policy. The district court found Judge Ryan's procedures effectuated legitimate municipal interests and were a valid exercise of judicial policy making powers. The district court stated that since Judge Sims was bound by judicial policies, he lacked authority to sentence DWI and domestic abuse offenders absent a pre-sentence evaluation. Judge Sims then filed a Notice of Appeal with the Court of Appeals which the Court of Appeals certified to this Court as presenting issues of substantial public interest and matters of superintending control best suited for this Court's review. NMSA 1978, 34-5-14 (C)(2).
III.
{4} We address whether the District Court's denial of Judge
Sims' Petition for Writ of Superintending Control and Judge Ryan's exercise of superintending control over other Judges in his court was proper. Since the issuance of a writ is a matter of judicial discretion, State ex rel. Harvey v. Medler, 19 N.M. 252, 259, 142 P.2d 376, 379 (1914), this Court applies the abuse of discretion standard of review in considering the district courts' actions. .
A.
{5} Judge Ryan argues that as the Las Cruces Municipal Court's Presiding Judge, local ordinance gives him authority to establish judicial policies, including requiring evaluations, pre-sentence reports and scheduling delayed sentences. He contends that unlike other Judges, the Presiding Judge takes and holds office with established supervisory authority over the part-time and alternate Judges. This authority, Judge Ryan suggests, empowers the Presiding Judge to establish and enforce judicial power, to set the part-time and alternate Judges' hours of attendance, and to establish what types of matters the Judges hear. Therefore, Judge Ryan contends that it follows that as Presiding Judge he has the au
Page 1 2 3 New Mexico DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|