In the Matter of Malachi D., 2026 N.M. LEXIS 24 (N.M. 2026)
The New Mexico Court of Appeals held that Malachi D. was reserved his right to appeal despite his plea, and the trial court erred in granting counsel’s request to dismiss the cause as the adjudication hearing was not heard in a timely manner.
The court reasoned in part: “We believe that the judgment and disposition indicates that all of the critical requirements for a conditional plea are met. The judgment and disposition acknowledges Child’s “right to appeal the judgment and order of this Court.” The judgment and disposition was signed by the prosecutor, indicating that the State approved the contents of the document. The judgment and disposition was also signed by counsel for Child, indicating Child’s intent to reserve his right to appeal as opposed to waiving it, and by the district court judge, indicating that the district court approved Child’s reservation of the right to appeal.
. . .
When a child is detained pending an adjudicatory hearing, as Child was in this case, the child’s liberty interests are best protected by following Rule 10-243(A) as written, together with the rules that require the state to serve the petition on the child with reasonable diligence, to file proof of service, and, once the deadline for the adjudicatory hearing is established, to obtain extensions only for good cause shown. In short, we decline to add the words “initial appearance” or “oral notice of the charges” to the words our Supreme Court chose to include in Rule 10-243(A) because adding those words is not “necessary to conform to the obvious intent [of the rule], or to prevent absurdity.” State v. Elam, 1989-NMCA-006, ¶ 16, 108 N.M.268, 771 P.2d 597.
{26} For these reasons, we hold that, absent any evidence of when Child was served with the petition, the thirty-day clock started when Child was placed in detention on February 20. See Rule 10-243(A). The deadline was therefore Monday, March 24, because the thirtieth day fell on Saturday, March 22. See Rule 10-107(A)(1)(c)NMRA. Because there was no extension of time for good cause, the time expired before an adjudicatory hearing was held.”
