April Arg Flashcards
Outline (8 items)
NMCD doesn’t care about sentencing math. Don’t care about getting sentence right in the first place, don’t care about keeping it on track. Don’t care about correcting what went wrong.
3 year Physical injury
NMCD inflicted it through systemic negligence.
Committed same negligence in 60 files in a year
OMS is the Callaway gang (if they had hurt 60)
Law: ton of law back to Upton, up through Sanders which essentially decides this case,
D position: In the face of that, D: irrelevant, Admin sec class even t bough bad law from 2006 - but don’t care.
NMCD refusing to care took 3 years of Mr. Baca’s life.
NMCD concerns (4 and explanation)
Too late to hear this motion - treat as new sj if needed, new facts
Reconsideration - unlike ours, D is adding nothing new
Expert- D never named own, never requested depo.
RELEVANCE - 3rd order language
Miscalculation Misinterpretation (4)
Can’t tell where one ends and other begins
J&S is a formula. Can be wrong, but for how long?
Keep putting wrong answer on every sheet.
Complexity is no excuse; fix it by report to court and parties on PRD. To prisoner re PRD. Compare PRD to monthly dates.
Safeguards ignored or non existent (4)
Policies; other states
Good time errors Form
Release audit - Calculations are correct - used arbitrarily, no evidence of review.
Management: Catanach not told, is told and does nothing, or consulted inappropriately as a lawyer/judge
Safeguards in other state policies (3 categories)
Good time
Co - Parole Eligibility date
AZ - good time awarded once per year
AUDIT POLICIES NEED MORE CASES
Sentencing Document Correction
CO - time comp analyst “will contact” courts
CA - shall refer for clarification
Elvidge shows the rot (6 1 repeat)
Marshall Elvidge
Bad methods, no supervision, no post error analysis or punishment.
“Elvidge’s good time was not tracked correctly from the beginning.”
Remember GJ email about correcting J&S with judge. Floundering with DA GO TO THE JUDGE
NMCD counsel: “this is a mess.”
NO focus on J&S, couldn’t be when even good time is ignored.
NO DISCIPLINE, NO REVIEW OF POLICIES.
Call the judge
Gary Jones: “He encouraged I call the Judge but I know we can’t”
Context of other physical injuries (theme and 3)
Theme: Bad method, no supervision, no post error analysis
Bridge - everyone uses software, someone wants to do it by hand
Nobody supervises to see if it’s done right
Bridge falls down 4 people trapped under it, and nobody asks why.
Pool - everyone uses a standard measure, someone calculates chemicals by hand, 5 kid gets infection, nobody asks why
Baca - no standard method. Hand and ad hoc interpretations. 60 files erroneous. Implicit policy not to ask judge. Nobody asks why, nobody disciplined.
Individuals committing vs. group. (2)
Callaway lots of individuals dropped the ball
Always will be individual failures. Are the individual failures discrete or systemically linked?
Management
Callaway featured impunity. NMCD has never disciplined any of these officers.
Absurd comparisons (3)
bridge falls down “math was hard”
Building falls down injures 60 people “math was hard”
Chemical burns in a swimming pool “chemistry is tough”
Physical counter examples 4
Not reputational, no breach of contract, damage to property, regulatory
Took his physical body and kept it physically in a concrete building under armed guard deprived of all outside contact and freedom of movement
Third order date
Which order language re records (5 forms, 4 cats of forms, why relevant?)
3rd order
2nd order language re affidavit and paragraph
3 items
2nd order language re affidavit
Paragraph
2nd order date
First order date
RFP 7 language 4
RFP 4 language
What NMCD does not deny 11
Existence of good time form
Inconsistent use of GT form
Release audit form calculations correct
Inconsistent use
No effort to check application of J&S before the end
Catanach making judicial decisions… sometimes (D IN SANDERS)
No training
No discipline
Policies in other states ignored
60 errors at least in files in one year
Their own communications. This is a mess. What’s wrong with us.
Prewitt (full name, year, Court)
Tying what to what?
Upton v (name, Court, year)
Lessen v (full name, year, Court)
Paragraph for reasoning
Lessen (full name, Court, year) holding
Enriquez (full name, Court, year, (4 factors from which case, 1st f 3 parts)
Sanders (full name, Court, year, paragraph for key holding)
Jackson (name Court year holding
Here, the City’s failure to require Lessees to obtain liquor liability insurance did not, in and of itself, create a dangerous condition to the general public that led to Plaintiffs’ decedent’s death. See, e.g., Archibeque v. Moya, 116 N.M. 616, 866 P.2d 344 (1993). In Archibeque, for example, a prison administrator negligently failed to check a list of names before placing an inmate into an area of the prison with his known enemies. 116 N.M. at 618, 866 P.2d at 346. In declining to equate this with negligent operation of a building under Section 41–4–6, our Supreme Court noted a difference between cases involving only a “discrete administrative decision” that did not make the premises any more dangerous beyond “the reasonable and expected risks of prison life,” and the cases demonstrating “a general condition of unreasonable risk from negligent security practices,” for which the governmental entity does waive immunity under the TCA. Archibeque, 116 N.M. at 622, 866 P.2d at 350 (Ransom, J., specially concurring).
Jackson v. City of Albuquerque, 2011 WL 5041211, at *2 (N.M. Ct. App. July 19, 2011)
Hauff (name Court year re law)
- In Callaway, we held that the plaintiff’s allegations that the prison population as a whole was unsafe because of the defendants’ failure to properly manage the housing of known gang members were substantively different from those in Archibeque, where the plaintiff’s misclassification related to him alone and did not endanger the rest of the prison population. See id. ¶ 18.
Hauff v. City of Albuquerque, 2019 WL 1226101, at *2 (N.M. Ct. App. Feb. 14, 2019)
Quevado (name Court year holding)
B. CYFD Owes a Duty of Ordinary Care to Children Under Its Jurisdiction
Quevedo v. New Mexico Children Youth & Families Dep’t, 2016-NMCA-101, ¶ 13, 385 P.3d 657, 662
Waiver jury?
Case name, court, year, paragraph
Statutory Construction
{31} Statutory interpretation is a pure question of law subject to de novo review. See Truong v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2010-NMSC-009, ¶ 22, 147 N.M. 583, 227 P.3d 73. This de novo standard applies to the determination of whether TCA immunity bars a tort claim. Rutherford, 2003-NMSC-010, ¶ 8, 133 N.M. 756, 69 P.3d 1199.
Kreutzer v. Aldo Leopold High Sch., 2018-NMCA-005, ¶¶ 30-31, 409 P.3d 930, 937
Encinias duty paragraph
Encinias uses a bad word
Jackson comparison to Archibeque
Upton on one
4 cases cited
Paragraph
Upton’s tent pole cases
Upton on a v c paragraph
Prewitt Espinoza discussion
Leopold full name court year facts
Upton fact synopsis
Physical injury case location year
False imprisonment is a physical injury and condition, being “the direct restraint
by one person of the physical liberty of another without adequate legal justification.”
Jordan v. Shands, 255 Va. 492, 500 S.E.2d 215, 218 (1998).
Physical - Iran, title year court holding
Custody or physical control” can arise out of, for example, a kidnapping or imprisonment. Valore v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 700 F. Supp. 2d 52, 74 (D.D.C. 2010).
Villoldo v. Republic of Cuba, 2023 WL 2390713, at *10 (D. Colo. Mar. 7, 2023)
Bodily def, source
Bodily injury def and source
Turner Name Court Year Holding
That pleading was filed almost two years after Mrs. Turner’s asserted *426 confinement and physical mistreatment; so it was barred by the one-year statute of limitations applicable to actions for false imprisonment and for assault and battery.
Arkansas Supreme Court
Turner v. Baptist Med. Ctr., 275 Ark. 424, 425–26, 631 S.W.2d 275, 277 (1982)
Corneau Name Court Year Holding
he offense of false imprisonment, defined in Section 30–4–3, “consists of intentionally confining or restraining another person without his consent and with knowledge that he has no lawful authority to do so.”
State v. Corneau, 1989-NMCA-040, ¶ 7, 109 N.M. 81, 85, 781 P.2d 1159, 1163
What we (plaintiff) has added to this motion 4
Policies from other states
Review of files
60 erroneous files in one year
Expert review.
