State v. Jimenez, 810 P.2d 801 (N.M. 1991)

Cases | State v. Jimenez, 810 P.2d 801 (N.M. 1991) | 2018

In State v. Jimenez, 110 N.M. 212, 794 P.2d 355 (N.M. Ct. App. 1990), the appellate court held that a prepresecution diversion agreement between the State and the accused may not be terminated by the State on the sole ground that the accused is unable to make restitution as provided in the agreement. The supreme court held that: (1) the appellate court “went too far” in holding, or at least strongly implying, that a PDA can never be terminated because of the defendant’s nonwilful inability to pay and in remanding with instructions that the trial court reinstate the defendant into the preprosecution diversion program; (2) under principles established in a prior case, the State may terminate a diversion agreement even if the sole ground is the defendant’s nonwilful failure to make restitution, but only if there are no adequate alternatives to termination that will meet the state’s legitimate penological interests; and (3) the case was remanded to trial court for consideration of any alternatives to termination and for determination of the adequacy of any such alternatives in meeting the State’s legitimate penological interests.