 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Nelson12/1/1995
r. 596, 508 A.2d 1149 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1986), the State argues that the Interstate Driver License Compact, codified in New Mexico at Section 66-5-49, controls the resolution of this issue. Regan cited the Compact as the basis for interpreting the words "of this section" to include DWI convictions from other states in criminal enhancement proceedings. See id. at 1152-53. We disagree with the reasoning of Regan. The Compact provides for reciprocal administrative enforcement of the traffic laws of each party state. Section 66-5-49, art. I, § B. The Compact regulates licensing and revocation but does not address criminal penalties such as jail time and does not regulate state substantive criminal law. Given the difference in New Mexico between administrative and criminal consequences, especially our mandatory sentencing and habitual offender provisions, it is reasonable to limit application of the provisions of the Compact to administrative proceedings. We find the better authority to be State ex rel. Motor Vehicle Division v. Holtz, 674 P.2d 732, 742 (Wyo. 1983), which held that the language "under this section" in a similar statute is plain and unambiguous and does not include convictions from other states.
Conclusion
18. Applying the plain meaning of the language in light of the rule of lenity, "under this section" does not include within its purview out-of-state convictions. Therefore, only those valid prior DWI convictions obtained in New Mexico courts may be considered for purposes of criminal enhancement penalties. We affirm the district court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, Judge
WE CONCUR:
RUDY S. APODACA, Chief Judge
RICHARD C. BOSSON, Judge
1 See § 66-8-102(E) (three times); § 66-8-102(F) (once); § 66-8-102(G) (once); § 66-8-102(H) (once); § 66-8-102(I) (once); § 66-8-102(J) (once); § 66-8-102(K) (once).
|