Summary
The New Mexico Supreme Court held that shooting entirely within a motor vehicle does not constitute shooting "at or from a motor vehicle" under NMSA 1978, Section 30-3-8(B), and therefore could not serve as the predicate felony for felony murder. The Court also concluded that insufficient evidence supported deliberation for attempted first-degree murder. It remanded for entry of judgments on lesser offenses and rejected the defendant's sentencing-enhancement and ineffective-assistance claims.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether shooting entirely within a motor vehicle constitutes shooting at or from a motor vehicle under NMSA 1978, Section 30-3-8(B), such that it may serve as the predicate felony for felony murder.
- Whether the jury's felony-murder finding necessarily established the elements of second degree murder and permitted remand for entry of judgment on that lesser included offense rather than a new trial.
- Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove deliberation for attempted first degree murder when the defendant shot the two victims in rapid succession.
- Whether use of the same prior felony convictions to establish felon-in-possession guilt and to enhance the sentence for a separate attempted-murder conviction violated double jeopardy.
- Whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to introduce evidence that the principal witness had previously been found incompetent to stand trial.
Holdings
- Shooting entirely within a motor vehicle is not shooting at or from a motor vehicle under NMSA 1978, Section 30-3-8(B), and therefore cannot serve as the predicate felony for felony murder.
- Because the felony-murder instruction required the jury to find the mens rea for second degree murder, the jury necessarily found Tafoya guilty of second degree murder; the felony-murder conviction was vacated and the case remanded for entry of judgment on second degree murder.
- The evidence was insufficient to establish deliberation for attempted first degree murder; the conviction was vacated and the case remanded for entry of judgment on attempted second degree murder.
- Double jeopardy did not bar using the prior felony convictions to establish felon-in-possession guilt and to enhance the sentence for the separate offense of attempted murder.
- Tafoya did not establish ineffective assistance of counsel because counsel's impeachment strategy was objectively reasonable; the court therefore did not reach prejudice.
Key quotations
“Due to the construction of the statute and the nature of the offense, we hold that Defendant’s conduct fell outside of the conduct for which Section 30-3-8(B) provides punishment.” (¶ 32)
“Thus, “shooting at or from a motor vehicle” cannot serve as the predicate felony for Defendant’s felony murder conviction.” (¶ 32)
“With the complete absence of other evidence to support deliberation, we cannot hold that Defendant proceeded from the rash impulsive murder of Larez to the willful, deliberate and premeditated attempted murder of Brady simply because a second or two might have elapsed between the shots.” (¶ 54)
Factual background
While Julian Tafoya and his girlfriend sat in the back seat of a vehicle driven by Crystal Brady, Andrea Larez and Brady were seated in the front. After the occupants had been drinking and using drugs while driving around Roswell, Tafoya fired multiple shots entirely within the vehicle, killing Larez and injuring Brady. The physical evidence indicated that the shots traveled from the back seat toward the front seats and did not leave the vehicle. The evidence also showed that the shots were fired in rapid succession and did not establish a motive or other circumstances demonstrating deliberation.
Procedural history
A jury convicted Tafoya of first degree felony murder predicated on shooting at or from a motor vehicle, attempted first degree murder, and tampering with evidence. The trial court separately found him guilty of felon in possession of a firearm and imposed a life sentence plus seventeen and one-half years. On direct appeal, the New Mexico Supreme Court held that the predicate shooting statute did not cover shooting entirely within a vehicle, that the evidence did not establish deliberation for attempted first degree murder, and that the remaining double-jeopardy and ineffective-assistance claims failed. The court remanded for entry of judgments on second degree murder and attempted second degree murder and for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.
Remand instructions
Remand to the Chaves County District Court to vacate the felony-murder conviction and enter judgment for second degree murder; vacate the attempted first degree murder conviction and enter judgment for attempted second degree murder; and conduct further proceedings consistent with the opinion.