7/3/08 UPDATE/CORRECTION: Phil Sisneros, director of communications at the New Mexico Attorney General's Office tells us that, contrary to a report in the Raton Range this week, the U.S. Supreme Court has NOT agreed to review a Colfax County vehicular homicide case.

The Attorney General's Office has until Aug. 15 to file a certiorai petition, asking the nation's high court to review evidentiary issues in the case, but hasn't done so yet, Sisneros told ABQjournal.com.

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review an evidentiary question in a Colfax County vehicular homicide case in which New Mexico courts had excluded statements made by a Texas man who allegedly had not been read his Miranda rights, the Raton Range reported.

The New Mexico Supreme Court heard oral arguments in April in the case of Roger Snell, 61, of Spring Branch, Texas, in connection with a crash on U.S. 87 about a mile east of Raton in March 2005, but then decided to let the state Court of Appeals decision stand upholding the exclusion of Snell's statements to a State Police officer, the Range reported.

Snell's pickup truck collided with a pickup driven by Heather Nielsen, 20, of Victorville, Calif., and Nielsen was pronounced dead a short time after the crash at Miners' Colfax Medical Center in Raton, according to the Range.

Snell was not charged with vehicular homicide until December 2005, almost nine months after the crash, the paper said.

His attorney, Steven McConnell of Raton, filed a motion to exclude statements Snell allegedly made to a State Police officer while sitting in the officer's patrol car not far from the scene of the crash, the Range reported.

McConnell also said the officer called Snell at his motel room about an hour and a half after the crash and questioned him again, but he argued that Snell had not been read his Miranda rights -- that he has a right to remain silent and to have an attorney -- before making his statements, the paper said.

A state district judge in 2006 granted Snell's motion to exclude the statements, and while a state appellate judge at first proposed to overturn the District Court ruling, a three-judge state Court of Appeals panel later allowed the lower court ruling to stand, according to the Range.

The case has been in limbo until the evidentiary issue is resolved, the paper reported.

The New Mexico Attorney General's Office, which has handling the issue for the prosecution during the appeals process, has until Aug. 15 to submit its brief to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Range reported. 

Your Name:

Your Email Address:

Rate this article:
Poor Great

Comment:

BOLD

"QUOTE"

UNDERLINE