Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
39 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 1930–2024 6 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New Mexico courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Gutierrezgreen2 sentences2012See Gutierrez, 116 N.M. at 432 , 863 P.2d at 1053 (rejecting a good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule as incompatible with New Mexico’s constitutional protections). 2012See Gutierrez, 116 N.M. at 432 , 863 P.2d at 1053 (rejecting a good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule as incompatible with New Mexico’s constitutional protections). | 7 | 10 |
Palmer v. Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad Co.green2 sentences2003See, e.g., Palmer, 75 N.M. at 740 , 410 P.2d at 958 . 2003See, e.g., Palmer, 75 N.M. at 740 , 410 P.2d at 958 . | 2 | 3 |
United States v. Leongreen2 sentences2015This good faith exception was founded upon an interest “to deter 5 police misconduct rather than to punish the errors of judges and magistrates.” Id. at 6 916. 2007Id. at 916 , 104 S.Ct. 3405 (footnote omitted). {11} Even before Leon, the Supreme Court described a good faith exception to the exclusionary rule in the context of a search incident to arrest. | 1 | 10 |
State v. Marsalagreen2 sentences1997I note that the Connecticut Supreme Court has rejected the good-faith exception, see State v. Marsala, 216 Conn. 150 , 579 A.2d 58 (1990), while ordinarily refusing to apply the exclusionary rule in probation-revocation proceedings, see Payne v. Robinson, 207 Conn. 565 , 541 A.2d 504 (1988). (31) Such analysis is unnecessary, however, if one adopts the view that the Fourth Amendment compels the exclusionary rule, regardless of pragmatic considerations. 1997I note that the Connecticut Supreme Court has rejected the good-faith exception, see State v. Marsala, 216 Conn. 150 , 579 A.2d 58 (1990), while ordinarily refusing to apply the exclusionary rule in probation-revocation proceedings, see Payne v. Robinson, 207 Conn. 565 , 541 A.2d 504 (1988). (31) Such analysis is unnecessary, however, if one adopts the view that the Fourth Amendment compels the exclusionary rule, regardless of pragmatic considerations. | 1 | 3 |
State v. Cordovagreen2 sentences2009In concluding that the Aguilar-Spinelli test, a two-pronged test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964) and Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S.Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969), was better suited to the guarantees embedded in the New Mexico Constitution, we noted this Court’s “close acquaintance with the problems and traditions of our state,” Cordova, 109 N.M. at 216 n. 8, 784 P.2d at 35 n. 8, and determined that the principles underlying the Aguilar-Spinelli test were the same “principles ... firmly and 2009In concluding that the Aguilar-Spinelli test, a two-pronged test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964) and Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S.Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969), was better suited to the guarantees embedded in the New Mexico Constitution, we noted this Court’s “close acquaintance with the problems and traditions of our state,” Cordova, 109 N.M. at 216 n. 8, 784 P.2d at 35 n. 8, and determined that the principles underlying the Aguilar-Spinelli test were the same “principles ... firmly and | 1 | 2 |
Commonwealth v. Edmundsgreen2 sentences1993See State v. Marsala, 216 Conn. 150 , 579 A.2d 58 (1990); State v. Guzman, 122 Idaho 981 , 842 P.2d 660 (1992); State v. Novembrino, 105 N.J. 95 , 519 A.2d 820 (1987); People v. Bigelow, 66 N.Y.2d 417 , 497 N.Y.S.2d 630 , 488 N.E.2d 451 (1985); State v. Carter, 322 N.C. 709 , 370 S.E.2d 553 (1988); Commonwealth v. Edmunds, 526 Pa. 374 , 586 A.2d 887 (1991); State v. Oakes, 157 Vt. 171 , 598 A.2d 119 (1991); see also Mason v. State, 534 A.2d 242 (Del.1987) (rejecting good-faith exception on statutory grounds); Gary v. State, 262 Ga. 573 , 422 S.E.2d 426 (1992) (same); Commonwealth v. Upton, 394 1993See State v. Marsala, 216 Conn. 150 , 579 A.2d 58 (1990); State v. Guzman, 122 Idaho 981 , 842 P.2d 660 (1992); State v. Novembrino, 105 N.J. 95 , 519 A.2d 820 (1987); People v. Bigelow, 66 N.Y.2d 417 , 497 N.Y.S.2d 630 , 488 N.E.2d 451 (1985); State v. Carter, 322 N.C. 709 , 370 S.E.2d 553 (1988); Commonwealth v. Edmunds, 526 Pa. 374 , 586 A.2d 887 (1991); State v. Oakes, 157 Vt. 171 , 598 A.2d 119 (1991); see also Mason v. State, 534 A.2d 242 (Del.1987) (rejecting good-faith exception on statutory grounds); Gary v. State, 262 Ga. 573 , 422 S.E.2d 426 (1992) (same); Commonwealth v. Upton, 394 | 1 | 2 |
State v. Benallygreen1 sentence2021See State v. Benally, 2015-NMCA-053, ¶ 7 , 348 P.3d 1039 (“We will not read language into the statute that is not there, especially when the statute makes sense as written.” (alteration, internal quotation marks, and citation omitted)). | 1 | 1 |
Ruegsegger v. Board of Regents of Western New Mexico Universitygreen1 sentence2021See Ruegsegger, 2007-NMCA-030, ¶ 39 . {21} We hold under New Mexico law that the termination provision’s good faith requirement renders the implied covenant inapplicable in this case. | 1 | 1 |
Anderson Living Trust v. Conocophillips Co.green1 sentence2021See Anderson Living Tr. v. ConocoPhillips Co., LLC, 952 F. Supp.2d 979, 1031-32 (“Generally, in the absence of an express provision on the subject, a contract contains an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing between the parties.” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). | 1 | 1 |
Rivera v. Illinoisgreen2 sentences2010Cf. Rivera v. Illinois, -U.S.-,-, 129 S.Ct. 1446, 1453 , 173 L.Ed.2d 320 (2009) (“If a defendant is tried before a qualified jury composed of individuals not challengeable for cause, the loss of a peremptory challenge due to a state court’s good-faith error is no matter of federal constitutional concern.”). 2010Cf. Rivera v. Illinois, -U.S.-,-, 129 S.Ct. 1446, 1453 , 173 L.Ed.2d 320 (2009) (“If a defendant is tried before a qualified jury composed of individuals not challengeable for cause, the loss of a peremptory challenge due to a state court’s good-faith error is no matter of federal constitutional concern.”). | 1 | 1 |
Campos v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See, e.g., Gomez, 1997-NMSC-006, ¶¶ 33-40 (requiring exigent circumstances to justify the warrantless search of an automobile, contrary to United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798, 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2157 , 72 L.Ed.2d 572 (1982), modified by Arizona v. Gant, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 1710 , 173 L.Ed.2d 485 (2009)); Campos v. State, 117 N.M. 155, 158 , 870 P.2d 117, 120 (1994) (declining to adopt the “blanket federal rule” that all warrantless arrests of felons where based on probable cause and in public places are constitutionally permissible); State v. Gutierrez, 116 N.M. 431, 432 , 863 P.2d 1052, 1053 (19 2009See, e.g., Gomez, 1997-NMSC-006, ¶¶ 33-40 (requiring exigent circumstances to justify the warrantless search of an automobile, contrary to United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798, 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2157 , 72 L.Ed.2d 572 (1982), modified by Arizona v. Gant, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 1710 , 173 L.Ed.2d 485 (2009)); Campos v. State, 117 N.M. 155, 158 , 870 P.2d 117, 120 (1994) (declining to adopt the “blanket federal rule” that all warrantless arrests of felons where based on probable cause and in public places are constitutionally permissible); State v. Gutierrez, 116 N.M. 431, 432 , 863 P.2d 1052, 1053 (19 | 1 | 1 |
Arizona v. Gantgreen2 sentences2009See, e.g., Gomez, 1997-NMSC-006, ¶¶ 33-40 (requiring exigent circumstances to justify the warrantless search of an automobile, contrary to United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798, 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2157 , 72 L.Ed.2d 572 (1982), modified by Arizona v. Gant, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 1710 , 173 L.Ed.2d 485 (2009)); Campos v. State, 117 N.M. 155, 158 , 870 P.2d 117, 120 (1994) (declining to adopt the “blanket federal rule” that all warrantless arrests of felons where based on probable cause and in public places are constitutionally permissible); State v. Gutierrez, 116 N.M. 431, 432 , 863 P.2d 1052, 1053 (19 2009See, e.g., Gomez, 1997-NMSC-006, ¶¶ 33-40 (requiring exigent circumstances to justify the warrantless search of an automobile, contrary to United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798, 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2157 , 72 L.Ed.2d 572 (1982), modified by Arizona v. Gant, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 1710 , 173 L.Ed.2d 485 (2009)); Campos v. State, 117 N.M. 155, 158 , 870 P.2d 117, 120 (1994) (declining to adopt the “blanket federal rule” that all warrantless arrests of felons where based on probable cause and in public places are constitutionally permissible); State v. Gutierrez, 116 N.M. 431, 432 , 863 P.2d 1052, 1053 (19 | 1 | 1 |
State v. Granvillegreen2 sentences2009Thus, according to the plain language of Gomez, to preserve his claim Defendant needed only to “assert[] the constitutional principle that provides the protection sought under the New Mexico Constitution” and “show[] the factual basis needed for the trial court to rule on the issue.” 1997-NMSC-006, ¶ 22 ; see also State v. Granville, 2006-NMCA-098, ¶ 13 , 140 N.M. 345 , 142 P.3d 933 (“When existing precedent construes a state constitutional provision as providing broader protection than its federal counterpart, the preservation of the state constitutional claim requires no more than preservati 2009Thus, according to the plain language of Gomez, to preserve his claim Defendant needed only to “assert[] the constitutional principle that provides the protection sought under the New Mexico Constitution” and “show[] the factual basis needed for the trial court to rule on the issue.” 1997-NMSC-006, ¶ 22 ; see also State v. Granville, 2006-NMCA-098, ¶ 13 , 140 N.M. 345 , 142 P.3d 933 (“When existing precedent construes a state constitutional provision as providing broader protection than its federal counterpart, the preservation of the state constitutional claim requires no more than preservati | 1 | 1 |
State v. Granvillegreen2 sentences2009Thus, according to the plain language of Gomez , to preserve his claim Defendant needed only to "assert[] the constitutional principle that provides the protection sought under the New Mexico Constitution" and "show[] the factual basis needed for the trial court to rule on the issue." 1997-NMSC-006, ¶ 22 ; see also State v. Granville, 2006-NMCA-098, ¶ 13 , 140 N.M. 345 , 142 P.3d 933 ("When existing precedent construes a state constitutional provision as providing broader protection than its federal counterpart, the preservation of the state constitutional claim requires no more than preservat 2009Thus, according to the plain language of Gomez, to preserve his claim Defendant needed only to “assert[] the constitutional principle that provides the protection sought under the New Mexico Constitution” and “show[] the factual basis needed for the trial court to rule on the issue.” 1997-NMSC-006, ¶ 22 ; see also State v. Granville, 2006-NMCA-098, ¶ 13 , 140 N.M. 345 , 142 P.3d 933 (“When existing precedent construes a state constitutional provision as providing broader protection than its federal counterpart, the preservation of the state constitutional claim requires no more than preservati | 1 | 1 |
State v. Gomezgreen2 sentences2009See, e.g., Gomez, 1997-NMSC-006, ¶¶ 33-40 (requiring exigent circumstances to justify the warrantless search of an automobile, contrary to United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798, 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2157 , 72 L.Ed.2d 572 (1982), modified by Arizona v. Gant, ___ U.S. ___, 129 S.Ct. 1710 , 173 L.Ed.2d 485 (2009)); Campos v. State, 117 N.M. 155, 158 , 870 P.2d 117, 120 (1994) (declining to adopt the "blanket federal rule" that all warrantless arrests of felons where based on probable cause and in public places are constitutionally permissible); State v. Gutierrez, 116 N.M. 431, 432 , 863 P.2d 1052, 1053 2009See, e.g., Gomez, 1997-NMSC-006, ¶¶ 33-40 (requiring exigent circumstances to justify the warrantless search of an automobile, contrary to United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798, 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2157 , 72 L.Ed.2d 572 (1982), modified by Arizona v. Gant, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 1710 , 173 L.Ed.2d 485 (2009)); Campos v. State, 117 N.M. 155, 158 , 870 P.2d 117, 120 (1994) (declining to adopt the “blanket federal rule” that all warrantless arrests of felons where based on probable cause and in public places are constitutionally permissible); State v. Gutierrez, 116 N.M. 431, 432 , 863 P.2d 1052, 1053 (19 | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Rossgreen2 sentences2009See, e.g., Gomez, 1997-NMSC-006, ¶¶ 33-40 (requiring exigent circumstances to justify the warrantless search of an automobile, contrary to United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798, 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2157 , 72 L.Ed.2d 572 (1982), modified by Arizona v. Gant, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 1710 , 173 L.Ed.2d 485 (2009)); Campos v. State, 117 N.M. 155, 158 , 870 P.2d 117, 120 (1994) (declining to adopt the “blanket federal rule” that all warrantless arrests of felons where based on probable cause and in public places are constitutionally permissible); State v. Gutierrez, 116 N.M. 431, 432 , 863 P.2d 1052, 1053 (19 2009See, e.g., Gomez, 1997-NMSC-006, ¶¶ 33-40 (requiring exigent circumstances to justify the warrantless search of an automobile, contrary to United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798, 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2157 , 72 L.Ed.2d 572 (1982), modified by Arizona v. Gant, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 1710 , 173 L.Ed.2d 485 (2009)); Campos v. State, 117 N.M. 155, 158 , 870 P.2d 117, 120 (1994) (declining to adopt the “blanket federal rule” that all warrantless arrests of felons where based on probable cause and in public places are constitutionally permissible); State v. Gutierrez, 116 N.M. 431, 432 , 863 P.2d 1052, 1053 (19 | 1 | 1 |
| Dawson v. United Statesgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Pincheira v. Allstate Insurancegreen | 1 | 1 |
| Gonzales v. Surgidev Corp.green | 1 | 1 |
| Pincheira v. Allstate Insurance Co.green | 1 | 1 |
| Jones v. Britt Airways, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Attawaygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Wilkes v. Springside Nursing Home, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Wernergreen | 1 | 1 |
| Mason v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| United States v. Wong Quong Wonggreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Grawiengreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Crenshawgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Rowegreen | 1 | 1 |
| Gladstone v. Gregorygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Mexico. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Estate of Gutierrez v. Meteor Monument
green
2 sentences2024Jaramillo v. Meteor Monument, LLC, 2012-NMSC-004, ¶ 9 , 274 P.3d 97 , 5 and 4F this regulation specifically includes it as a component of the good faith requirement of Section 7-9-43(A). 2024Jaramillo v. Meteor 8 Monument, LLC, 2012-NMSC-004, ¶ 9 , 274 P.3d 97 ,5 and this regulation 9 specifically includes it as a component of the good faith requirement of Section 7-9- 10 43(A). | 2 | 2024–2024 |
Estate of Gutierrez Ex Rel. Jaramillo v. Meteor Monument
green
2 sentences2024Jaramillo v. Meteor Monument, LLC, 2012-NMSC-004, ¶ 9 , 274 P.3d 97 , 5 and 4F this regulation specifically includes it as a component of the good faith requirement of Section 7-9-43(A). 2024Jaramillo v. Meteor 8 Monument, LLC, 2012-NMSC-004, ¶ 9 , 274 P.3d 97 ,5 and this regulation 9 specifically includes it as a component of the good faith requirement of Section 7-9- 10 43(A). | 2 | 2024–2024 |
Jones v. N.M. Dep't of Public Safety
green
2 sentences2024The OAG’s construction of the good faith requirement as sufficient to meet its 17 burden in an enforcement action in district court is inconsistent with our Supreme 18 Court’s holding that, when an IPRA enforcement action is filed in district court 19 under Section 14-2-12 alleging that information was improperly withheld, “the 20 burden [falls on the public agency] to demonstrate that one of the IPRA exceptions 16 1 from inspection covered the withheld records.” See Jones v. City of Albuquerque 2 Police Dep’t, 2020-NMSC-013, ¶ 49 , 470 P.3d 252 ; see also Estate of Romero ex 3 rel. 2024The OAG’s construction of the good faith requirement as sufficient to meet its 17 burden in an enforcement action in district court is inconsistent with our Supreme 18 Court’s holding that, when an IPRA enforcement action is filed in district court 19 under Section 14-2-12 alleging that information was improperly withheld, “the 20 burden [falls on the public agency] to demonstrate that one of the IPRA exceptions 16 1 from inspection covered the withheld records.” See Jones v. City of Albuquerque 2 Police Dep’t, 2020-NMSC-013, ¶ 49 , 470 P.3d 252 ; see also Estate of Romero ex 3 rel. | 2 | 2024–2024 |
Jicarilla Apache Nation v. Rodarte
green
2 sentences2024We give deference to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of its own 11 regulation, see Jicarilla Apache Nation v. Rodarte, 2004-NMSC-035, ¶ 25 , 136 12 N.M. 630 , 103 P.3d 554 , and our Legislature has specifically acknowledged that the 13 administrative construction of a statute may be considered when determining the 14 meaning of statutory text, NMSA 1978, § 12-2A-20(B)(4) (1997). 2024We give deference to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of its own 11 regulation, see Jicarilla Apache Nation v. Rodarte, 2004-NMSC-035, ¶ 25 , 136 12 N.M. 630 , 103 P.3d 554 , and our Legislature has specifically acknowledged that the 13 administrative construction of a statute may be considered when determining the 14 meaning of statutory text, NMSA 1978, § 12-2A-20(B)(4) (1997). | 2 | 2024–2024 |
Estate of Romero Ex Rel. Romero v. City of Santa Fe
green
2 sentences2024Romero v. City of Santa Fe, 2006-NMSC-028, ¶¶ 18-19 , 139 N.M. 671 , 137 4 P.3d 611 (holding that a public body has the burden of proving that the information 5 requested is not subject to inspection and that in camera review by the district court 6 of the requested records may be necessary to reach a determination). 2024Romero v. City of Santa Fe, 2006-NMSC-028, ¶¶ 18-19 , 139 N.M. 671 , 137 4 P.3d 611 (holding that a public body has the burden of proving that the information 5 requested is not subject to inspection and that in camera review by the district court 6 of the requested records may be necessary to reach a determination). | 2 | 2024–2024 |
State v. Wagoner
green
2 sentences2011However, notwithstanding New Mexico's rejection of the good faith exception, "not all evidence discovered as the result of police misconduct need be suppressed." State v. Wagoner, 2001-NMCA-014, ¶ 22 , 130 N.M. 274 , 24 P.3d 306 . 2011However, notwithstanding New Mexico's rejection of the good faith exception, "not all evidence discovered as the result of police misconduct need be suppressed." State v. Wagoner, 2001-NMCA-014, ¶ 22 , 130 N.M. 274 , 24 P.3d 306 . | 2 | 2011–2011 |
State v. Novembrino
green
2 sentences1991We cannot agree with the Supreme Court that this benefit is "marginal or non-existent." On the other hand, "[b]y eliminating any cost for noncompliance with the constitutional requirement of probable cause, the good-faith exception assures us *1338 that the constitutional standard will be diluted." State v. Novembrino , 105 N.J. at 129 , 519 A.2d at 854 . 1991We cannot agree with the Supreme Court that this benefit is "marginal or non-existent." On the other hand, "[b]y eliminating any cost for noncompliance with the constitutional requirement of probable cause, the good-faith exception assures us *1338 that the constitutional standard will be diluted." State v. Novembrino , 105 N.J. at 129 , 519 A.2d at 854 . | 2 | 1991–1993 |
State v. Gutierrez
green
2 sentences1991This court declined to adopt the good faith exception in State v. Gutierrez, 112 N.M. 774 , 819 P.2d 1332 (Ct.App. 1991) (Bivins, J., dissenting). 1991This court declined to adopt the good faith exception in State v. Gutierrez, 112 N.M. 774 , 819 P.2d 1332 (Ct.App. 1991) (Bivins, J., dissenting). | 2 | 1991–1993 |
Griego v. Oliver
green
1 sentence2024But that general observation does not preclude inquiry into whether a seller’s own actions comport with the good faith requirement of Section 7-9-43 (A). 8 1 often using the dictionary for guidance.” Griego v. Oliver, 2014-NMSC-003, ¶ 21 , 2 316 P.3d 865 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see also NMSA 1978, 3 § 12-2A-2 (1997) (stating that the meaning of an undefined phrase in a statute is 4 determined by its context, the rules of grammar, and common usage). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
State v. JADE G.
green
2 sentences2020Although the UPC imposes a good faith requirement on third parties who deal with a personal representative, see § 45-3-714(A) (“A person who in good faith . . . deals with [a personal representative] for value is protected as if the personal representative properly exercised [a] power.” (emphasis added)), Section 45-3-910 does not mention one, and we presume that this omission was intentional.6 See State v. Jade G., 2007-NMSC-010, ¶ 28 , 141 N.M. 284 , 154 P.3d 659 (“[W]hen the Legislature includes a particular word in one portion of a statute and omits it from another portion of that statute, 2020Although the UPC imposes a good faith requirement on third parties who deal with a personal representative, see § 45-3-714(A) (“A person who in good faith . . . deals with [a personal representative] for value is protected as if the personal representative properly exercised [a] power.” (emphasis added)), Section 45-3-910 does not mention one, and we presume that this omission was intentional.6 See State v. Jade G., 2007-NMSC-010, ¶ 28 , 141 N.M. 284 , 154 P.3d 659 (“[W]hen the Legislature includes a particular word in one portion of a statute and omits it from another portion of that statute, | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Lyons v. Howard
green
2 sentences2015Hot Springs Plumbing & Heating Co. v. Wallace, 1933-NMSC-092 , ¶ 40, 38 N.M. 3 , 27 P.2d 984 (citing Lyons v. Howard, 1911-NMSC-039 , 16 N.M. 327 , 117 P. 842 ), held that notwithstanding liberal construction, and substantial compliance with verification, the claimant must still “verify [the] same on his own oath, or the oath of some other person” to verify the good faith of his claim of right to a lien. 2015Hot Springs Plumbing & Heating Co. v. Wallace, 1933-NMSC-092 , ¶ 40, 38 N.M. 3 , 27 P.2d 984 (citing Lyons v. Howard, 1911-NMSC-039 , 16 N.M. 327 , 117 P. 842 ), held that notwithstanding liberal construction, and substantial compliance with verification, the claimant must still “verify [the] same on his own oath, or the oath of some other person” to verify the good faith of his claim of right to a lien. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Hot Springs Plumbing & Heating Co. v. Wallace
green
2 sentences2015Hot Springs Plumbing & Heating Co. v. Wallace, 1933-NMSC-092 , ¶ 40, 38 N.M. 3 , 27 P.2d 984 (citing Lyons v. Howard, 1911-NMSC-039 , 16 N.M. 327 , 117 P. 842 ), held that notwithstanding liberal construction, and substantial compliance with verification, the claimant must still “verify [the] same on his own oath, or the oath of some other person” to verify the good faith of his claim of right to a lien. 2015Hot Springs Plumbing & Heating Co. v. Wallace, 1933-NMSC-092 , ¶ 40, 38 N.M. 3 , 27 P.2d 984 (citing Lyons v. Howard, 1911-NMSC-039 , 16 N.M. 327 , 117 P. 842 ), held that notwithstanding liberal construction, and substantial compliance with verification, the claimant must still “verify [the] same on his own oath, or the oath of some other person” to verify the good faith of his claim of right to a lien. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Aguilar v. Texas
red
2 sentences2009In concluding that the Aguilar-Spinelli test, a two-pronged test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964) and Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S.Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969), was better suited to the guarantees embedded in the New Mexico Constitution, we noted this Court’s “close acquaintance with the problems and traditions of our state,” Cordova, 109 N.M. at 216 n. 8, 784 P.2d at 35 n. 8, and determined that the principles underlying the Aguilar-Spinelli test were the same “principles ... firmly and 2009In concluding that the Aguilar-Spinelli test, a two-pronged test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964) and Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S.Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969), was better suited to the guarantees embedded in the New Mexico Constitution, we noted this Court’s “close acquaintance with the problems and traditions of our state,” Cordova, 109 N.M. at 216 n. 8, 784 P.2d at 35 n. 8, and determined that the principles underlying the Aguilar-Spinelli test were the same “principles ... firmly and | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Spinelli v. United States
red
2 sentences2009In concluding that the Aguilar-Spinelli test, a two-pronged test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964) and Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S.Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969), was better suited to the guarantees embedded in the New Mexico Constitution, we noted this Court’s “close acquaintance with the problems and traditions of our state,” Cordova, 109 N.M. at 216 n. 8, 784 P.2d at 35 n. 8, and determined that the principles underlying the Aguilar-Spinelli test were the same “principles ... firmly and 2009In concluding that the Aguilar-Spinelli test, a two-pronged test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964) and Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S.Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969), was better suited to the guarantees embedded in the New Mexico Constitution, we noted this Court’s “close acquaintance with the problems and traditions of our state,” Cordova, 109 N.M. at 216 n. 8, 784 P.2d at 35 n. 8, and determined that the principles underlying the Aguilar-Spinelli test were the same “principles ... firmly and | 1 | 2009–2009 |
| Public Service Company of New Mexico v. NEW MEXICO PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION green | 1 | 2008–2008 |
| State v. Vandenberg green | 1 | 2008–2008 |
| Pina v. Espinoza green | 1 | 2008–2008 |
| Michigan v. DeFillippo green | 1 | 2007–2007 |
| City of Farmington v. Benally green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| State v. Vallejos green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| Payne v. Robinson green | 1 | 1997–1997 |
| Lockett v. State green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| Commonwealth v. Upton green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| People v. Sundling green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| Stringer v. State green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| State v. Guzman green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| State v. Oakes green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| State v. Carter green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| People v. Bigelow green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| Gary v. State green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| Hernandez v. Cabrera green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| State v. Huft green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| State v. Herrera green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Herrera v. New Mexico green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Thompson v. Reivitz green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Dugger v. Delta Airlines green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Massachusetts v. Sheppard green | 1 | 1985–1985 |
| Schlegel v. Hough neutral | 1 | 1974–1974 |
| Crenshaw v. Williams green | 1 | 1930–1930 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.