case for an evidentiary hearing in New Mexico

2026In rare circumstances, however, the record may be sufficiently developed that an appellate court can rule on the issue without further inquiry by the trial court.”); see also State v. Roybal, 2002-NMSC-027, ¶ 19 , 132 N.M. 657 , 54 P.3d 61 (“[A]n appellate court may remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the defendant makes a prima facie case of ineffective assistance.”) {35} The State responds that the record is insufficiently developed for this Court to decide Defendant’s IAC claim because essential facts regarding counsel’s representation—particularly as to plea negotiations—are still

2026In rare circumstances, however, the record may be sufficiently developed that an appellate court can rule on the issue without further inquiry by the trial court.”); see also State v. Roybal, 2002-NMSC-027, ¶ 19 , 132 N.M. 657 , 54 P.3d 61 (“[A]n appellate court may remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the defendant makes a prima facie case of ineffective assistance.”) {35} The State responds that the record is insufficiently developed for this Court to decide Defendant’s IAC claim because essential facts regarding counsel’s representation—particularly as to plea negotiations—are still

2025“If facts 15 necessary to a full determination are not part of the record, an ineffective assistance 16 claim is more properly brought through a habeas corpus petition, although an 17 appellate court may remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the defendant makes 18 a prima facie case of ineffective assistance.” State v. Crocco, 2014-NMSC-016, ¶ 14 , 19 327 P.3d 1068 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). 21 1 {28} Two elements are necessary to establish a prima facie case of ineffective 2 assistance of counsel.

2025“If facts necessary to a full determination are not part of the record, an ineffective assistance claim is more properly brought through a habeas corpus petition, although an appellate court may remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the defendant makes a prima facie case of ineffective assistance.” State v. Crocco, 2014-NMSC-016, ¶ 14 , 327 P.3d 1068 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). {4} Defense counsel’s performance is deficient if his or her conduct falls below that of a reasonably competent attorney.

2013Accordingly, the district court had 15 jurisdiction to consider the State’s motion and to enter the January 24, 2011, probation 16 revocation order. 17 {22} Defendant contends that, in the alternative, we should remand this case “for an 18 evidentiary hearing to determine whether he received effective assistance of counsel 19 in accepting his plea agreement.” As we have noted, “[w]hen an ineffective assistance 14 1 claim is first raised on direct appeal, we evaluate the facts that are part of the record. 2 If facts necessary to a full determination are not part of the record, an ineffective 3

2013Accordingly, the district court had 15 jurisdiction to consider the State’s motion and to enter the January 24, 2011, probation 16 revocation order. 17 {22} Defendant contends that, in the alternative, we should remand this case “for an 18 evidentiary hearing to determine whether he received effective assistance of counsel 19 in accepting his plea agreement.” As we have noted, “[w]hen an ineffective assistance 14 1 claim is first raised on direct appeal, we evaluate the facts that are part of the record. 2 If facts necessary to a full determination are not part of the record, an ineffective 3

2022See Dylan J., 2009-NMCA-027, ¶ 39 (explaining that “an appellate court may remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the defendant makes a prima facie case of ineffective assistance 3Mother additionally implies that substitution of her counsel during one of the adjudicatory hearings contributed to the ineffective assistance of her counsel.

2019“If facts necessary to a full determination are not part of the record, an ineffective assistance claim is more properly brought through a habeas corpus petition, although an appellate court may remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the defendant makes a prima facie case of ineffective assistance.” Id. {37} “A defendant makes a prima facie case of ineffective assistance despite full and adequate factual support in the record by showing that defense counsel's performance fell below the standard of a reasonably competent attorney and, due to the deficient performance, the defense was preju

2011If facts necessary to a full 18 determination are not part of the record, an ineffective assistance claim 19 is more properly brought through a habeas corpus petition, although an 20 appellate court may remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the 21 defendant makes a prima facie case of ineffective assistance. 22 State v. Roybal, 2002-NMSC-027, ¶ 19 , 132 N.M. 657 , 54 P.3d 61 . 4 1 To establish a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel, [the 2 d]efendant must show that (1) counsel’s performance was deficient in 3 that it “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness”;

2011If facts necessary to a full 18 determination are not part of the record, an ineffective assistance claim 19 is more properly brought through a habeas corpus petition, although an 20 appellate court may remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the 21 defendant makes a prima facie case of ineffective assistance. 22 State v. Roybal, 2002-NMSC-027, ¶ 19 , 132 N.M. 657 , 54 P.3d 61 . 4 1 To establish a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel, [the 2 d]efendant must show that (1) counsel’s performance was deficient in 3 that it “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness”;

2019“Our Supreme Court 12 has expressed a preference that ineffective assistance of counsel claims be 13 adjudicated in habeas corpus proceedings, rather than on direct appeal.” Id. ¶ 7. 14 “Therefore, this Court will only remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the 15 record on appeal supports a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel.” 16 Id. 17 {33} A prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel requires a defendant 18 to establish that: “(1) counsel’s performance fell below that of a reasonably 19 competent attorney; (2) no plausible, rational strategy or tactic expl

2019“Our Supreme Court 12 has expressed a preference that ineffective assistance of counsel claims be 13 adjudicated in habeas corpus proceedings, rather than on direct appeal.” Id. ¶ 7. 14 “Therefore, this Court will only remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the 15 record on appeal supports a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel.” 16 Id. 17 {33} A prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel requires a defendant 18 to establish that: “(1) counsel’s performance fell below that of a reasonably 19 competent attorney; (2) no plausible, rational strategy or tactic expl

2025See State v. Grogan, 2007-NMSC-039, ¶ 11 , 142 N.M. 107 , 163 P.3d 494 . “[J]udicial review of the effectiveness of counsel’s performance must be highly deferential, and courts should recognize that counsel is strongly presumed to have rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment.” Lytle v. Jordan, 2001-NMSC-016, ¶ 50 , 130 N.M. 198 , 22 P.3d 666 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see also State v. Roybal, 2002-NMSC-027, ¶ 21 , 132 N.M. 657 , 54 P.3d 61 (stating that an appellate court presumes that counsel’s

2025See State v. Grogan, 2007-NMSC-039, ¶ 11 , 142 N.M. 107 , 163 P.3d 494 . “[J]udicial review of the effectiveness of counsel’s performance must be highly deferential, and courts should recognize that counsel is strongly presumed to have rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment.” Lytle v. Jordan, 2001-NMSC-016, ¶ 50 , 130 N.M. 198 , 22 P.3d 666 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see also State v. Roybal, 2002-NMSC-027, ¶ 21 , 132 N.M. 657 , 54 P.3d 61 (stating that an appellate court presumes that counsel’s

2017However, we do not have Huerta’s response to these contentions because he was not a party to this matter. {36} Because there are insufficient facts in the record, Defendant’s argument of ineffective assistance of counsel “is more properly brought through a habeas corpus petition, although an appellate court may remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the defendant makes a prima facie case of ineffective assistance.” State v. Roybal, 2002-NMSC-027, ¶ 19 , 132 N.M. 657 , 54 P.3d 61 . {37} The Court of Appeals erroneously remanded this case to the district court for an evidentiary hearing. “[

2016“When an ineffective 14 assistance claim is first raised on direct appeal, we evaluate the facts that are part of 15 the record.” State v. Roybal, 2002-NMSC-027, ¶ 19 , 132 N.M. 657 , 54 P.3d 61 . “[A]n 16 appellate court may remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the defendant makes 17 a prima facie case of ineffective assistance.” State v. Paredez, 2004-NMSC-036, ¶ 22 , 18 136 N.M. 533 , 101 P.3d 799 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). 4 1 {9} “A prima facie case of ineffective assistance is made by showing that defense 2 counsel’s performance fell below the standard of a r

2026See State v. 7 Gomez, 1991-NMCA-061 , ¶¶ 10-11, 112 N.M. 313 , 815 P.2d 166 (rejecting a 8 defendant’s request for remand because the defendant sought to develop a record 9 that was lacking on direct appeal and reiterating that habeas corpus is the preferred 10 remedy).

2026See State v. 7 Gomez, 1991-NMCA-061 , ¶¶ 10-11, 112 N.M. 313 , 815 P.2d 166 (rejecting a 8 defendant’s request for remand because the defendant sought to develop a record 9 that was lacking on direct appeal and reiterating that habeas corpus is the preferred 10 remedy).

2011If facts necessary to a full 18 determination are not part of the record, an ineffective assistance claim 19 is more properly brought through a habeas corpus petition, although an 20 appellate court may remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the 21 defendant makes a prima facie case of ineffective assistance. 22 State v. Roybal, 2002-NMSC-027, ¶ 19 , 132 N.M. 657 , 54 P.3d 61 . 4 1 To establish a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel, [the 2 d]efendant must show that (1) counsel’s performance was deficient in 3 that it “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness”;

2011If facts necessary to a full 18 determination are not part of the record, an ineffective assistance claim 19 is more properly brought through a habeas corpus petition, although an 20 appellate court may remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the 21 defendant makes a prima facie case of ineffective assistance. 22 State v. Roybal, 2002-NMSC-027, ¶ 19 , 132 N.M. 657 , 54 P.3d 61 . 4 1 To establish a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel, [the 2 d]efendant must show that (1) counsel’s performance was deficient in 3 that it “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness”;

2021“If facts necessary to a full determination are not part of the record, an ineffective assistance claim is more properly brought through a habeas corpus petition, although an appellate court may remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the defendant makes a prima facie case of ineffective assistance.” Id. {48} To present a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel, “a defendant must establish that (1) counsel’s performance was deficient, and (2) such deficiency resulted in prejudice against the defendant.” State v. Garcia, 2011-NMSC-003, ¶ 33 , 149 N.M. 185 , 246 P.3d 1057 (emph

2021“If facts necessary to a full determination are not part of the record, an ineffective assistance claim is more properly brought through a habeas corpus petition, although an appellate court may remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the defendant makes a prima facie case of ineffective assistance.” Id. {48} To present a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel, “a defendant must establish that (1) counsel’s performance was deficient, and (2) such deficiency resulted in prejudice against the defendant.” State v. Garcia, 2011-NMSC-003, ¶ 33 , 149 N.M. 185 , 246 P.3d 1057 (emph

2009We further note that our Supreme Court has indicated that “[t]he Court[ ] of Appeals has been reluctant to rule on the effectiveness of counsel without a fully developed record and has recognized that a remand might usurp [the Supreme] Court’s role in habeas proceedings under Rule 5-802.” Hunter, 2006-NMSC-043, ¶30 , 140 N.M. 406 , 143 P.3d 168 . {42} We read our Supreme Court jurisprudence as acknowledging this Court’s discretion to remand a case for an evidentiary hearing where a defendant has made a prima facie case of ineffective assistance.

2009We further note that our Supreme Court has indicated that “[t]he Court[ ] of Appeals has been reluctant to rule on the effectiveness of counsel without a fully developed record and has recognized that a remand might usurp [the Supreme] Court’s role in habeas proceedings under Rule 5-802.” Hunter, 2006-NMSC-043, ¶30 , 140 N.M. 406 , 143 P.3d 168 . {42} We read our Supreme Court jurisprudence as acknowledging this Court’s discretion to remand a case for an evidentiary hearing where a defendant has made a prima facie case of ineffective assistance.

2024Id. ¶ 14. {5} To prove a prima facie case of ineffective assistance, “a defendant must establish that (1) counsel’s performance was deficient, and (2) such deficiency resulted in prejudice against the defendant.” See State v. Garcia, 2011-NMSC-003, ¶ 33 , 149 N.M. 185 , 246 P.3d 1057 ; accord Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984); see also State v. Dylan J., 2009-NMCA-027, ¶ 36 , 145 N.M. 719 , 204 P.3d 44 (providing that the defendant bears the burden of demonstrating both deficient performance and prejudice).

2016“If facts necessary to a full 10 determination are not part of the record, an ineffective assistance claim is more 11 properly brought through a habeas corpus petition, although an appellate court may 12 remand a case for an evidentiary hearing if the defendant makes a prima facie case of 13 ineffective assistance.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). 14 {27} Defendant asserts that the CI’s testimony would have corroborated Defendant’s 15 testimony that the two other men were the true source of the drugs and other 16 contraband found in Defendant’s truck.

1991In State v. Powers, 111 N.M. 10 , 800 P.2d 1067 (Ct.App.1990), we also stated that remanding a case for an evidentiary hearing to develop facts supporting a defendant’s claim on appeal would circumvent Rule 5-802, which provides review of post-conviction evidentiary proceedings by way of certiorari to the supreme court.

1991In State v. Powers, 111 N.M. 10 , 800 P.2d 1067 (Ct.App.1990), we also stated that remanding a case for an evidentiary hearing to develop facts supporting a defendant’s claim on appeal would circumvent Rule 5-802, which provides review of post-conviction evidentiary proceedings by way of certiorari to the supreme court.

2018See State v. 4 Castro, 2016-NMCA-085, ¶¶ 58-59 , 381 P.3d 694 (Hanisee, J., dissenting) (stating 5 that “[t]he majority’s analysis also depends on [unsupported] assumption[s]” 6 regarding both the legal viability of an unfiled motion and unknown defense trial 7 strategy and noting our Supreme Court’s “preference that ineffective assistance of 8 counsel claims be presented and resolved in collateral proceedings”), rev’d by 9 2017-NMSC-027, ¶ 36 , 402 P.3d 688 (holding that “[b]ecause there are 10 insufficient facts in the record, [the d]efendant’s argument . . . is more properly 11 brought thro

2018See State v. 4 Castro, 2016-NMCA-085, ¶¶ 58-59 , 381 P.3d 694 (Hanisee, J., dissenting) (stating 5 that “[t]he majority’s analysis also depends on [unsupported] assumption[s]” 6 regarding both the legal viability of an unfiled motion and unknown defense trial 7 strategy and noting our Supreme Court’s “preference that ineffective assistance of 8 counsel claims be presented and resolved in collateral proceedings”), rev’d by 9 2017-NMSC-027, ¶ 36 , 402 P.3d 688 (holding that “[b]ecause there are 10 insufficient facts in the record, [the d]efendant’s argument . . . is more properly 11 brought thro

2017“To state a claim for 8 ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must establish that (1) counsel’s 9 performance was deficient, and (2) such deficiency resulted in prejudice against the 10 defendant.” Garcia, 2011-NMSC-003, ¶ 33 (emphasis added). 11 {29} Assuming without deciding that trial counsel’s failure to request a voluntary 12 intoxication instruction constituted deficient performance, we conclude that Defendant 13 has failed to meet his burden because he points to nothing in the record establishing 14 that “as a result of the deficient performance, there was a reasonable probabil

2017“To state a claim for 8 ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must establish that (1) counsel’s 9 performance was deficient, and (2) such deficiency resulted in prejudice against the 10 defendant.” Garcia, 2011-NMSC-003, ¶ 33 (emphasis added). 11 {29} Assuming without deciding that trial counsel’s failure to request a voluntary 12 intoxication instruction constituted deficient performance, we conclude that Defendant 13 has failed to meet his burden because he points to nothing in the record establishing 14 that “as a result of the deficient performance, there was a reasonable probabil

2012See In re Adoption of Doe, 16 100 N.M. at 765 , 676 P.2d at 1330 (stating that where a party cites no authority to 17 support an argument, we may assume no such authority exists).

2012See In re Adoption of Doe, 16 100 N.M. at 765 , 676 P.2d at 1330 (stating that where a party cites no authority to 17 support an argument, we may assume no such authority exists).