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 Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions.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.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BUSTAMANTE, Judge.

{1} Defendant Thomas J. Newkirk appeals from his convictions by jury of aggravated burglary and larceny of a firearm. In this Court's notice of proposed disposition, filed July 26, 2016, we proposed to summarily affirm. Defendant filed a memorandum in opposition to proposed summary affirmance (MIO), which we have duly considered. Remaining unpersuaded, we affirm Defendant's convictions.

{2} In his memorandum in opposition, Defendant raises no new arguments or facts regarding his sufficiency argument that are not otherwise addressed by this Court's notice of proposed disposition. Rather, Defendant reiterates the same facts and arguments already made and contends that, in this case, the circumstantial evidence should not be sufficient to support his convictions. [See MIO 1, 4-7] These arguments were addressed in our notice of proposed disposition [see CN 9-10], so we refer Defendant to our reasoning and analysis therein.

{3} Accordingly, for the reasons stated in our notice of proposed disposition and herein, we affirm Defendant's convictions.

{4} IT IS SO ORDERED.

M. MONICA ZAMORA, Judge and STEPHEN G. FRENCH, Judge, concurs.