State of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Amadeo Martinez, Defendant-Appellant (New Mexico 1981)

Summary

The court affirmed the convictions and sentences after rejecting challenges to the denial of a change of venue, admission of a videotaped deposition, and refusal to excuse two jurors for cause. It held that the venue ruling was supported by substantial evidence, that the deceased witness’s deposition satisfied confrontation requirements and that the procedural defect in recording it caused no prejudice, and that any error concerning the jurors was harmless because the seated jury was not alleged to be biased.

Holding

Change of venue. Because the defendant presented evidence and the State presented conflicting evidence at a hearing, the discretionary venue statute applied. The trial court’s denial of a change of venue was supported by substantial evidence and did not constitute an abuse of discretion.

Admission of videotaped deposition. Admission of the videotaped deposition did not violate the confrontation clause because the witness was unavailable due to death and the defendant had a sufficient opportunity for cross-examination when the deposition was taken. Although the State failed to obtain the order required for nonstenographic recording, exclusion was not required because the defect was technical, the objection was untimely, and the defendant showed no prejudice.

Challenges to jurors for cause. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to excuse the two jurors for cause. Even assuming error, it was harmless because the defendant did not allege that the jurors who ultimately sat on the case were biased, prejudiced, or unfair, or that he would have used the peremptory challenges to remove any seated jurors.

State of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Amadeo Martinez, Defendant-Appellant

Summary

Holding

Cited authorities

Cited by