June 23, 2020- City of Roswell v. John Monafo, No. A-1-CA-38637

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Corrections to this opinion/decision not affecting the outcome, at the Court’s discretion, can occur up to the time of publication with
NM Compilation Commission. The Court will ensure that the electronic version of this opinion/decision is updated accordingly in
Odyssey.

1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO
Court of Appeals of New Mexico
Filed 6/23/2020 10:59 AM

2 CITY OF ROSWELL,

3 Plaintiff-Appellee, MAK We fT ected
Mark Reynolds

Allv. NO. A-1-CA-38637

5| JOHN MONAFO,

6 Defendant-Appellant.

7| APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF CHAVES COUNTY

James M. Hudson, District Judge

Office of the City Attorney

10
11

Parker William Patterson
Roswell, NM

12

13

for Appellee

John Monafo

14

15

Roswell, NM

Pro Se Appellant

16

MEMORANDUM OPINION

17

18

VARGAS, Judge.

a3 Defendant-Appellant John Monafo (Defendant) seeks to appeal his convictions

19

for driving on a suspended or revoked license, lack of registration, and lack of

20

21

insurance. We previously issued a notice of proposed summary disposition, proposing

to dismiss on grounds that Defendant failed to timely file his notice of appeal with the

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

district court. Defendant has filed a memorandum in opposition. After due
consideration, we remain unpersuaded. We therefore dismiss the appeal.

23 As we observed in the notice of proposed summary disposition, notice of
appeal must be filed with the district court within thirty days after the entry of a final
order. See Rule 12-201(A)(2) NMRA; 12-202(A) NMRA. Because the timely filing
of notice of appeal with the district court is a mandatory precondition to the exercise
of jurisdiction, see Garcia v. State, 2010-NMSC-023, 4 25, 148 N.M. 414, 237 P.3d
716, we do not ordinarily entertain an appeal if the notice of appeal is filed late. See
State v. Upchurch, 2006-NMCA-076, 9 5, 139 N.M. 739, 137 P.3d 679 (“[I]n the
absence of exceptional circumstances, we rigidly enforce the mandatory time limits
for filing the notice of appeal.”).

33 In this case, the final order of the district court was entered on October 15,
2019. It was therefore incumbent upon Defendant to file notice of appeal no later than
November 14, 2019. See Rule 12-308(A)(1) NMRA (describing the computation of
time, where the relevant period is eleven days or longer). We surmise that Defendant’s
assertion to the contrary [MIO 1] 1s premised upon a misapprehension of the relevant
rules. See id. Defendant did not file his notice of appeal with the district court until
November 15, 2019. As we previously observed, this was untimely; and absent a
showing of extraordinary circumstances, dismissal is warranted. See, e.g., Upchurch,

2006-NMCA-076, {7 1-6 (dismissing an appeal filed one day late, where exceptional

13

circumstances were not demonstrated and the presumption of ineffective assistance
of counsel did not apply). There has been no suggestion of extraordinary
circumstances in this case. As a consequence, we adhere to our initial assessment.

4: Accordingly, for the reasons stated above and in the notice of proposed

summary disposition, the appeal is dismissed.

6} ITISSO ORDERED.

h dat Ch Yoga

LIE J. VARGAS, Judge

WE CONCUR:

KRISTINA BOCCaDUS, Judge