N.M. R. App. P. 12-212
ANNOTATIONS The 2012 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 12-8300-017, effective August 3, 2012, required that a designation or non-designation of depositions and exhibits be filed within fifteen days after service of the general calendar assignment and in Paragraph A, in the first sentence, after "videotapes or the like, shall be", deleted "made" and added "filed"; after "fifteen (15) days", deleted "of the assignment of the case to the" and added "after service of the", and after "general calendar", added "assignment"; added the second sentence; in the third sentence, after "appellant's designation", added "or notice of non-designation"; and in the fourth sentence, after "district court clerk", added "and served on the appellate court and the other parties to the appeal". The 1997 amendment, effective January 1, 1997, substituted "fifteen (15) days" for "ten (10) days" in two places in Paragraph A. Burden is on appellant to provide necessary appellate record of transcript and exhibits. State v. Garcia, 1978-NMCA-109, 92 N.M. 730, 594 P.2d 1186, cert. denied, 92 N.M. 532, 591 P.2d 286 (1979). Court of appeals may send for exhibits. - The court of appeals has authority, on its own motion, to have exhibits sent to it for its review when those exhibits have been introduced, and relied on, before the trial court. State v. Garcia, 1978-NMCA-109, 92 N.M. 730, 594 P.2d 1186, cert. denied, 92 N.M. 532, 591 P.2d 286 (1979). Nondesignation of records as part of exhibits. - Because certain psychological records were not designated as part of the exhibits for an appeal from a murder conviction, they were not before the appellate court for review to determine if the trial court correctly denied access to them. State v. Sacoman, 1988-NMSC-077, 107 N.M. 588, 762 P.2d 250. Where exhibits not in record, appellate court will not consider suppression motion. - The court of appeals will not consider defendant's motion to suppress where the pertinent exhibits are not a part of the record on appeal, nor were they designated as a part of the record on appeal. State v. Duncan, 1980-NMCA-162, 95 N.M. 215, 619 P.2d 1259. Affidavits not brought to trial court's attention will not be considered when they are attached to the docketing statement. State v. Lucero, 1977-NMCA-021, 90 N.M. 342, 563 P.2d 605, cert. denied, 90 N.M. 636, 567 P.2d 485. Technical violation may be disregarded. - Although the defendant failed to designate the necessary exhibits for his appeal, the appellate court declined to dismiss the appeal for such a technical violation, when the state ensured the proper exhibits were before the court. State v. Manes, 1991-NMCA-025, 112 N.M. 161, 812 P.2d 1309, cert. denied, 112 N.M. 77, 811 P.2d 575, cert. denied, 502 U.S. 942, 112 S. Ct. 381, 116 L. Ed. 2d 332 (1991). Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. - 5 Am. Jur. 2d Appellate Review § 484 et seq. 4 C.J.S. Appeal and Error § 440 et seq.