City of Aztec v. Gurule

Summary

The New Mexico Supreme Court held that municipal ordinances are law rather than adjudicative facts and therefore may be judicially noticed by courts without being pleaded and proven as part of a prima facie case. The court overruled prior precedent to the extent it required proof of municipal ordinances as facts, applied the new rule to pending and future cases, and affirmed Anthony Gurule’s aggravated DWI conviction under the Aztec City Code.

Holdings

1. Municipal ordinances are law, not adjudicative facts, and therefore need not be pleaded and proven as facts to establish a prima facie case.
2. All New Mexico courts, including appellate courts, may judicially notice municipal ordinances as law when necessary to resolve a case.
3. The new rule applies to pending and future cases, and Gurule's conviction is affirmed because the municipal ordinance did not need to be introduced into evidence.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a municipal ordinance must be pleaded and proven as an adjudicative fact in order to support a municipal criminal conviction.
2. Whether courts in New Mexico may take judicial notice of municipal ordinances as law.
3. Whether the change in treatment of municipal ordinances should apply to Gurule's pending case.

Disposition

affirmed