Saunders v. Rodriguez
Saunders v. Rodriguez
Opinion
This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports.
Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the filing date.
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO NICKIE SAUNDERS, 3 Petitioner-Appellant, v. NO. 34,575 KAITLYNN RODRIGUEZ and ROBERT GARCIA, 7 Respondents-Appellees.
8 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF EDDY COUNTY Raymond L. Romero, District Judge Nickie Saunders Carlsbad, NM Pro Se Appellant Kaitlyn Rodriguez Robert Garcia Carlsbad, NM Pro Se Appellees 17 MEMORANDUM OPINION VIGIL, Judge.
19 {1} Petitioner-Appellant Nickie Saunders (Petitioner) appeals from the district court’s order denying her petition to be appointed as the kinship guardian for Donovan H. (Child). On May 21, 2015, this Court issued a notice of proposed disposition wherein we proposed to affirm the district court’s decision. Child’s mother filed a document with this Court asserting that she no longer consents to Petitioner being appointed guardian of Child. This information, however, was not before the district court and this Court, therefore, will not consider it on appeal. See State v. Reynolds, 1990-NMCA-122, ¶ 16, 111 N.M. 263, 804 P.2d 1082 (“Matters outside the record present no issue for review.”). Petitioner, on the other hand, has not filed a memorandum opposing this Court’s notice of proposed disposition, and the time for doing so has now passed. See Frick v. Veazey, 1993-NMCA-119, ¶ 2, 116 N.M. 246, 861 P.2d 287 (“Failure to file a memorandum in opposition constitutes acceptance of the disposition proposed in the calendar notice.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s decision for the reasons articulated in this Court’s notice of proposed disposition.
15 {2} IT IS SO ORDERED.
16 ______________________________ 17 MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Chief Judge WE CONCUR: _________________________________ MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, Judge _________________________________ JONATHAN B. SUTIN, Judge
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.