Cluster 891666
green
· 647 citation events
across 5 courts.
Showing the 50 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
green
Ramirez v. United States (2023)
Compare Sutphin, 753 P.2d at 1319 (“[T]he test to determine the sufficiency of evidence in New Mexico, which is the same as enunciated in Jackson, is whether substantial evidence of either a direct or circumstantial nature exists to support a verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt with respect to every element essential to a conviction.”) (internal citation omitted), compare also Flores, 226 P.3d at 646 (“[W]e must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the gui…
“[W]e must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the guilty verdict, indulging all reasonable inferences and resolving all conflicts in the evidence in favor of the verdict.”
green
State v. Cerna (2026)
When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, we do not substitute our “judgment for that of the jury,” but we must “ensure that, indeed, a rational jury could have found beyond a reasonable doubt the essential facts required for a conviction.” Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 3 (quoting Garcia, 1992- NMSC-048, ¶ 27).
green
State v. Ward (2026)
“We cannot say the trial court 2 abused its discretion by its ruling unless we can characterize it as clearly untenable 3 or not justified by reason.” Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 25 (internal quotation marks 4 and citation omitted).
green
State v. Crawford (2026)
On one end are cases like State v. Flores, in which the record “support[ed] rational findings by a jury that [the d]efendant . . . acted deliberately rather than rashly and impulsively, in killing [the victim]” because “[t]he jury would have been amply justified in reasoning from the evidence . . . that [the d]efendant made and carried out a plan over a two-week period to exact revenge on [the victim] for rejecting him and to make sure that if he could not have [the victim],…
green
State v. Chavez (2024)
We have stated that motive in homicide 6 cases involve “the relationship of the parties and the animus of the accused toward 7 the deceased.” State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 32 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 8 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted), overruled on other grounds by 9 Martinez, 2021-NMSC-002, ¶ 87 .
green
State v. Ramirez (2018)
See Lucero, 1957-NMSC-062 , ¶ 4; see also Carrasco, 1997-NMSC-047 , 5 ¶¶ 10-19; cf. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 23 (“[E]vidence of flight . . . may prove 6 consciousness of guilt.”). 7 2.
green
State v. Lovett (2016)
Smith, 13 2016-NMSC-007, ¶¶ 20-23 (collecting cases, and finding deliberate intent where the 14 defendant stabbed his former girlfriend ninety times); Guerra, 2012-NMSC-027 , ¶ 29 15 (concluding that a defendant who rendered the victim defenseless and then proceeded 16 to stab the victim thirteen times was overkill sufficient to establish deliberate intent); 17 Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 22 (determining that a factor supporting deliberate intent 18 was proof the defendant stab…
green
State v. Earley (2016)
Further, “[n]ot only may 19 Defendant’s acts before and during the crime provide evidence of intent, [but] 32 1 evidence of flight or an attempt to deceive the police may prove consciousness of 2 guilt.” Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 23 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). 3 {48} In this case, the State presented substantial evidence at trial to raise a reasonable 4 inference of deliberate intent.
green
State v. Salazar (2016)
“The risk is that character evidence when used 15 circumstantially is likely to be given more probative value than it deserves and may 16 lead the fact-finder to punish a bad person regardless of the evidence of what 17 happened in the specific case.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). 18 {14} In order to admit evidence for a purpose other than proving Defendant’s 19 propensity to act in accordance with a character trait, the prosecution must “cogently 9 1 …
green
State v. Taylor E. (2016)
The district court specifically tailored the evidence in this case by 17 excluding all other prior bad acts mentioned in the disciplinary reports, with the 18 exception of one statement “related to Victor Gonzales disciplining [Child] in the 19 past.” [DS 4; MIO 1] In accordance with the district court’s ruling, Mr. Gonzales 2 1 testified at trial that he had previously written up Child, as well as Child’s statement 2 about his former nickname of “demon,” and Child’s “intent…
green
State v. Smith (2016)
Cf. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶¶ 21-23 (discussing post-murder conduct, including disposal of evidence, as being probative of guilt).
green
State v. Smith (2016)
Cf. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶¶ 21-23 (discussingpost-murder conduct, including disposal of evidence, as being probative of guilt).
green
State v. Mark (2015)
See, e.g., State v. Guerra, 2012-NMSC-027, ¶ 29 , 284 15 P.3d 1076 (finding sufficient evidence of deliberate intent where the defendant 16 “stabbed the victim thirteen times” and “many of the wounds were to vital organs”); 17 Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 22 (finding sufficient evidence of deliberate intent where 18 the defendant stabbed the victim with a screwdriver “so many times that it evidenced 19 an effort at overkill”). 24 1 {39} In this case, the State presented evidence…
green
State v. Ferran (2015)
“The test for sufficiency of the evidence is whether substantial 13 evidence of either a direct or circumstantial nature exists to support a verdict of guilt 14 beyond a reasonable doubt with respect to every element essential to a conviction.” 15 Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 2 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). 16 “Substantial evidence is relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as 17 adequate to support a conclusion.” State v. Largo, 2012-NMSC-015, ¶…
green
State v. Slade (2014)
Cf. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 24 (discussing the “totality of the evidence in [the] record”); Vigil, 2010-NMSC-003, ¶ 18 (analyzing the state’s evidence “individually or collectively”). 3.
green
State v. Slade (2014)
Cf. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 24 (discussing the “totality of the evidence in [the] record”); Vigil, 2010-NMSC-003, ¶ 18 (analyzing the state’s evidence “individually or collectively”). 3.
green
State v. Benavidez (2013)
When considering whether a 7 statement constitutes an excited utterance under Rule 11-803(2), this Court considers 8 the totality of the circumstances, including how much time passed 9 between the startling event and the statement, and whether, in that time, 10 the declarant had an opportunity for reflection and fabrication; how 11 much pain, confusion, nervousness, or emotional strife the declarant was 12 experiencing at the time of the statement; whether the statement was …
green
State v. Daugherty (2013)
It was reasonable for the jury to 10 infer deliberate intent from this second round of coup de grace (kill shots), see, e.g., 11 Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶¶ 21-22 (citing multiple examples of juries’ inferences of 12 deliberate intent); and, because Defendant took the same steps with each killing, it was 13 reasonable for the jury to infer deliberate intent for each of them.
green
State v. Seager (2013)
“We cannot say the [district] court abused its discretion 12 by its ruling unless we can characterize it as clearly untenable or not justified by 13 reason.” Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 25 (internal quotation marks and citation 14 omitted). 15 {13} Here, the State called five members of Defendant’s family—his mother, two 16 brothers, sister-in-law, and ex-girlfriend—to identify him.
green
State v. Daugherty (2013)
It was reasonable for the jury to 13 infer deliberate intent from this second round of coup de grace (kill shots), see, e.g., 14 Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶¶ 21-22 (citing multiple examples of juries’ inferences of 15 deliberate intent); and, because Defendant took the same steps with each killing, it was 16 reasonable for the jury to infer deliberate intent for each of them.
green
State v. Flores (2012)
“We cannot say the [district] court abused its discretion 11 by its ruling unless we can characterize it as clearly untenable or not justified by 12 reason.” Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 25 (internal quotation marks and citation 13 omitted). 14 The district court in this case excluded any evidence that Defendant left his 15 residence for the purpose of buying beer on the night Kalynne died because it found 16 that the evidence was not probative of any fact at issue in the case a…
green
State v. Rose (2011)
See, e.g., Stephens v. Miller, 13 F.3d 998, 1003 (7th Cir.1994) (en banc) (“[T]he use of the term res gestae, for purposes of federal law, is essentially obsolete.”); Keating, supra, 754 F.2d at 509 (same proposition); State v. Dennis, 181 Ill.2d 87 , 229 Ill.Dec. 552 , 692 N.E.2d 325, 331 (1998) ("As a basis for the admissibility of hearsay evidence, Illinois has abandoned the concept of res gestae as amorphous, having been applied indiscriminately and inhibiting any reason…
noting that res gestae "create[s] more problems than it resolves,” and "is a completely unnecessary term in the evidence context"
green
State v. Martinez (2011)
He testified that he recalled seeing the boys but neither spoke with 7 them nor had any contact with them. 8 Even assuming “each component may be insufficient to support the conviction 9 when viewed alone[, it] does not mean the evidence cannot combine to form 10 substantial, or even overwhelming, support for the conviction when viewed as a 11 whole.” Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 17 (internal quotation marks and citation 12 omitted).
green
State v. Syed (2026)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶¶ 22, 24 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (concluding that lying in wait for the victim provided evidence of the defendant’s deliberate intent), overruled on other grounds by State v. Martinez, 2021- NMSC-002, ¶ 87, 478 P.3d 880 ; State v. Guerra, 2012-NMSC-027, ¶ 29 , 284 P.3d 1076 (concluding that evidence of “overkill” supported conviction for willful and deliberate murder); State v. Cunningham, 2000-NMSC-009, ¶ 28 , 128 N.M. 711 , 998 P.…
green
State v. Chavez (2025)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 22 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 , overruled on other grounds by State v. Martinez, 2021-NMSC-002, ¶ 87 , 478 P.3d 880 (recognizing a reasonable jury can consider a defendant wielding an object “for no other discernible purpose than to use it as a weapon” in finding deliberate intent); cf. State v. Largo, 2012-NMSC-015, ¶ 33 , 278 P.3d 532 (holding a reasonable jury could conclude the defendant deliberated prior to shooting and killing t…
green
State v. Rael (2025)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 25 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 , overruled on other grounds by State v. Martinez, 2021-NMSC-002, ¶ 87 , 478 P.3d 880 .
green
State v. Rael (2025)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 25 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 , overruled on other grounds by State v. Martinez, 2021-NMSC-002, ¶ 87 , 478 P.3d 880 .
green
State v. Martinez (2024)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 19 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (stating that “circumstantial evidence alone can amount to substantial evidence” and that “intent is subjective and is almost always inferred from other facts in the case” (alteration, internal quotation marks, and citation omitted)), overruled on other grounds by State v. Martinez, 2021-NMSC-002 , 478 P.3d 880 ; State v. Michael S., 1995-NMCA- 112, ¶ 7, 120 N.M. 617 , 904 P.2d 595 (stating that “[i]ntent…
green
State v. Chavez (2024)
See Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 17 (“The law does not require testimony from a witness who personally saw [the d]efendant at the very moment he actually stabbed his victim.”). {42} The primary focus of Defendant’s sufficiency challenge is not on the actus reus but the mens rea element of first-degree murder—deliberate intention—which, as the jury was instructed, may be inferred from all of the facts and circumstances of the killing.
green
State v. Tafoya (2024)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 19 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (“[C]ircumstantial evidence alone can amount to substantial evidence.”), overruled on other grounds by State v. Martinez, 2021-NMSC-002, ¶ 19 , 478 P.3d 880 ; State v. Rojo, 1999-NMSC-001, ¶ 19 , 126 N.M. 438 , 971 P.2d 829 (explaining that appellate courts disregard all evidence and inferences that support a different result); State v. Montoya, 2005-NMCA-078, ¶ 3 , 137 N.M. 713 , 114 P.3d 393 (“When a de…
green
State v. Blanco (2024)
See Sarracino, 1998-NMSC-022, ¶ 20 . {10} An excited utterance is “[a] statement relating to a startling event or condition, made while the declarant was under the stress or excitement that it caused.” Rule 11- 803(2) NMRA. “[T]o constitute an excited utterance, the declaration should be spontaneous, made before there is time for fabrication, and made under the stress of the moment.” State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 47 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (internal quotation marks…
green
State v. Montoya (2023)
See Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 23 (noting that “evidence of flight or an attempt to deceive the police may prove consciousness of guilt” that supports a conviction of deliberate intent murder (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)).
green
State v. Whipple (2022)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 19 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (stating that “circumstantial evidence alone can amount to substantial evidence” and that “intent is subjective and is almost always inferred from other facts in the case” (alteration, internal quotation marks, and citation omitted)), overruled on other grounds by State v. Martinez, 2021-NMSC- 002, 478 P.3d 880 ; State v. Michael S., 1995-NMCA-112 , ¶ 7, 120 N.M. 617 , 904 P.2d 595 (stating that “[i]ntent…
green
State v. Kramer (2021)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 22 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (explaining that deliberation was proven, in part, with evidence that the defendant carried the murder weapon “to the fatal confrontation for no other discernible purpose than to use it as a weapon, . . . immediately and calmly walked away from [the victim’s] bleeding body,” and attempted “to deceive and evade the authorities”), overruled on other grounds by State v. Martinez, 2021-NMSC-002, ¶ 87 , 478 P.…
green
State v. Martinez (2021)
See State v. Tollardo, 2012-NMSC-008, ¶ 25 , 275 P.3d 008 (explaining the applicability of harmless error review). {15} “[T]o constitute an excited utterance, the declaration[s] should be spontaneous, made before there is time for fabrication and made under the stress of the moment.” State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 47 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted), overruled on other grounds by State v. Martinez, 2021- NMSC-002, ¶ 87, 478 P.3…
green
State v. Pierre (2021)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 17 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (observing that evidence of an act may be sufficient absent eyewitness testimony), overruled on other grounds by State v. Martinez, 2021-NMSC-002, ¶ 87 , 478 P.3d 880 .
green
State v. Martinez (2020)
See Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 23 (stating that an attempt to deceive may demonstrate deliberate intent).
green
State v. Martinez (2020)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶¶ 57, 60 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (stating that pursuant to the independent source doctrine “the issue is whether the witness is identifying the defendant solely on the basis of his memory of events at the time of the crime, or whether he is merely remembering the person he picked out in a pretrial procedure” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)); State v. Johnson, 2004- NMCA-058, ¶ 27, 135 N.M. 567 , 92 P.3d 13 (same); se…
green
State v. Pamphille (2020)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 19 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (stating that “circumstantial evidence alone can amount to substantial evidence”).
green
State v. Benavidez (2020)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 19 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (stating that “intent is subjective and is almost always inferred from other facts in the case” (alteration, omission, internal quotation marks, and citation omitted)); State v. Michael S., 1995-NMCA-112 , ¶ 7, 120 N.M. 617 , 904 P.2d 595 ; see also Rojo, 1999-NMSC-001, ¶ 19 (stating that the jury is free to reject a defendant’s version of the facts).
green
State v. Ortiz-Parra (2020)
See id.
green
State v. Tavarez (2020)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 19 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (recognizing that “circumstantial evidence alone can amount to substantial evidence” and that intent is generally inferred from the circumstances). {5} Defendant argues that the evidence “is too ambiguous to establish that [Defendant] intended to commit a battery as opposed to, for example, ridding himself of the loaded gun to avoid injury as he was about to be dragged from his car.” The jury was, of cour…
green
State v. Moffitt (2020)
See State v. Sarracino, 1998-NMSC-022, ¶ 20 , 125 N.M. 511 , 964 P.2d 72 . {8} “[T]he theory underlying the excited utterance exception is that the exciting event induced the declarant's surprise, shock, or nervous excitement which temporarily stills capacity for conscious fabrication and makes it unlikely that the speaker would relate other than the truth.” State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 47 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). “[…
green
State v. Campos (2019)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 19 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (stating that “intent is subjective and is almost always inferred from other facts in the case” (alteration, internal quotation marks, and citation omitted)).
green
State v. Sena (2019)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC- 002, ¶ 23, 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (“[E]vidence of flight or an attempt to deceive the police may prove consciousness of guilt.” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)).
green
State v. Morrill (2019)
See Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 25 .
green
State v. Baca (2019)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶¶ 22-23 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (observing that sufficient evidence of deliberate intent may be established by a defendant’s actions before, during, and after the crime); State v. Begay, 1998-NMSC-029, ¶ 45 , 125 N.M. 541 , 964 P.2d 102 (concluding that sufficient evidence of deliberate intent was established by a defendant’s statements and actions including that the defendant “was carrying a knife”). {25} Fidel had at least eightee…
green
State v. Vigil (2019)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002, ¶ 23 , 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (“Not only may [the d]efendant’s acts before and during the crime provide evidence of intent [or] evidence of flight . . . may prove consciousness of guilt.”). {38} We have no trouble concluding that these facts constitute substantial evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Defendant helped, encouraged, or caused armed robbery and attempt to commit armed robbery.
green
State v. Chavez (2018)
See State v. Flores, 2010- 19 NMSC-002, ¶ 23, 147 N.M. 542 , 226 P.3d 641 (providing that “evidence of flight 20 or an attempt to deceive the police may prove consciousness of guilt” (internal 13 1 quotation marks and citation omitted)).
green
State v. Cales (2018)
See State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002 , 2 ¶ 23, 226 P.3d 641 (“[E]vidence of flight or an attempt to deceive the police may 3 prove consciousness of guilt.” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)); State 4 v. Rojo, 1999-NMSC-001, ¶ 24 , 126 N.M. 438 , 971 P.2d 829 (concluding that 5 evidence bearing on the method used to kill the victim was adequate to support a 6 conclusion that the killing was deliberate).