Kersey v. Hatch

Summary

The New Mexico Supreme Court held that State v. Frazier announced a new procedural rule providing that felony murder and its predicate felony are subsumed for double-jeopardy purposes. Applying the Teague retroactivity standard, the court concluded that the rule did not apply retroactively to Kersey’s finalized convictions because it was neither substantive nor a watershed rule of criminal procedure. The court affirmed dismissal of Kersey’s state habeas petition seeking to vacate his kidnapping conviction.

Holdings

1. State v. Frazier announced a new rule because it departed from prior New Mexico precedent permitting separate convictions for felony murder and the predicate felony when the conduct was factually distinct, replacing that inquiry with a bright-line rule that the offenses are subsumed in every case.
2. New Mexico courts should apply the Teague standard, rather than the Linkletter standard, when deciding whether a new rule applies retroactively to finalized criminal convictions in habeas corpus proceedings.
3. Frazier's new double-jeopardy rule is procedural rather than substantive and is not a watershed rule of criminal procedure; therefore, it does not apply retroactively to Kersey's finalized conviction in a habeas proceeding.

Questions Presented

1. Whether State v. Frazier announced a new rule of law.
2. Whether Kersey's convictions were final before Frazier was decided.
3. Whether New Mexico should apply the Teague rather than the Linkletter standard to determine the retroactivity of new rules in state habeas proceedings.
4. Whether Frazier's rule that felony murder and its predicate felony are subsumed offenses is substantive or a watershed procedural rule subject to retroactive application on habeas review.

Disposition

affirmed