fair and impartial hearing (New Mexico) · Go Syfert
← New Mexico issues

fair and impartial hearing in New Mexico

16 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 1982–2020 0 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.

Followed or applied (11)

CaseFollowedCited
New Mexico Board of Veterinary Medicine v. Rieggergreen
nm · 2007 · cited in 8 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2008–2019
2 sentences

2015“Procedural due process 8 requires a fair and impartial hearing before a trier of fact who is disinterested and free 9 from any form of bias or predisposition regarding the outcome of the case.” Riegger, 10 2007-NMSC-044, ¶ 27 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

2015“Procedural due process requires a fair and impartial hearing before a trier of fact who is disinterested and free from any form of bias or predisposition regarding the outcome of the case.” Riegger, 2007-NMSC-044, ¶ 27 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

58
Los Chavez Cmty. Assn. v. Valencia Cnty.green
nmctapp · 2012 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
2 sentences

2020In such proceedings, the council does not sit as a mini-legislature, as it functions in most matters, but instead must act like a judicial body bound by ethical standards comparable to those that govern a court in performing the same function.” Albuquerque Commons P’ship, 2008-NMSC-025, ¶ 33 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). {32} A quasi-judicial proceeding “carries with it important procedural consequences,” including due process protections “requir[ing] a fair and impartial hearing before a trier of fact who is disinterested and free from any form of bias or predisposition reg

2020While we have recognized that city or county officials “are not expected to be so insulated from their community as to require them to be detached from all issues coming before them[,]” we have also held that where a city or county has “prejudged the merits” of a particular matter, such prejudgment “give[s] rise to an appearance of impropriety[.]” Los Chavez Cmty. Ass’n, 2012-NMCA-044, ¶ 25 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

11
Albuquerque Commons Partnership v. City Council of Albuquerquegreen
nm · 2008 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
2 sentences

2020In such proceedings, the council does not sit as a mini-legislature, as it functions in most matters, but instead must act like a judicial body bound by ethical standards comparable to those that govern a court in performing the same function.” Albuquerque Commons P’ship, 2008-NMSC-025, ¶ 33 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). {32} A quasi-judicial proceeding “carries with it important procedural consequences,” including due process protections “requir[ing] a fair and impartial hearing before a trier of fact who is disinterested and free from any form of bias or predisposition reg

2020In such proceedings, the council does not sit as a mini-legislature, as it functions in most matters, but instead must act like a judicial body bound by ethical standards comparable to those that govern a court in performing the same function.” Albuquerque Commons P’ship, 2008-NMSC-025, ¶ 33 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). {32} A quasi-judicial proceeding “carries with it important procedural consequences,” including due process protections “requir[ing] a fair and impartial hearing before a trier of fact who is disinterested and free from any form of bias or predisposition reg

11
Buffington v. McGortygreen
nmctapp · 2004 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019
1 sentence

2019Indeed, “[p]rocedural due process is a flexible right[,] and the amount of process due depends on the particular circumstances of each case.” Sandia v. Rivera, 2002-NMCA- 057, ¶ 10, 132 N.M. 201 , 46 P.3d 108 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see Buffington, 2004-NMCA-092, ¶ 31 (explaining that “[t]he nature of the hearing and review to be conducted by the district court will depend upon the nature of the objections being considered” (emphasis added)). {13} Additionally, “[p]rocedural due process requires a fair and impartial hearing before a trier of fact who is disinterested a

11
State v. Bonillagreen
nm · 2000 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
2 sentences

2010See Orquiz, 2003-NMCA-089, ¶ 16 (reversing and remanding 16 the revocation of the defendant’s probation because the district court made an 17 unequivocal, definite finding on the record prior to the revocation hearing indicating 18 that the court had prejudged the defendant prior to the defendant having an 19 opportunity to be heard at the revocation hearing); Pacheco, 85 N.M. at 780 , 517 P.2d 7 1 at 1306 (concluding that to make arrangements for defendant’s incarceration with the 2 deputy warden prior to the probation hearing was a denial of his fundamental right to 3 a fair hearing because

2010See Orquiz, 2003-NMCA-089, ¶ 16 (reversing and remanding 16 the revocation of the defendant’s probation because the district court made an 17 unequivocal, definite finding on the record prior to the revocation hearing indicating 18 that the court had prejudged the defendant prior to the defendant having an 19 opportunity to be heard at the revocation hearing); Pacheco, 85 N.M. at 780 , 517 P.2d 7 1 at 1306 (concluding that to make arrangements for defendant’s incarceration with the 2 deputy warden prior to the probation hearing was a denial of his fundamental right to 3 a fair hearing because

11
State v. Orquizgreen
nmctapp · 2003 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
1 sentence

2010See Orquiz, 2003-NMCA-089, ¶ 16 (reversing and remanding 16 the revocation of the defendant’s probation because the district court made an 17 unequivocal, definite finding on the record prior to the revocation hearing indicating 18 that the court had prejudged the defendant prior to the defendant having an 19 opportunity to be heard at the revocation hearing); Pacheco, 85 N.M. at 780 , 517 P.2d 7 1 at 1306 (concluding that to make arrangements for defendant’s incarceration with the 2 deputy warden prior to the probation hearing was a denial of his fundamental right to 3 a fair hearing because

11
Chronis v. State Ex Rel. Rodriguezgreen
nm · 1983 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008Id. at 346-47 , 670 P.2d at 957-58 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

2008Id. at 346-47 , 670 P.2d at 957-58 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

11
Santa Fe Exploration Co. v. Oil Conservation Commissiongreen
nm · 1992 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 1995–1995
2 sentences

1995See Santa Fe Exploration, 114 N.M. at 109 , 835 P.2d at 825 (administrative trier of fact must be free from bias or prejudice regarding the outcome of a case).

1995See Santa Fe Exploration, 114 N.M. at 109 , 835 P.2d at 825 (administrative trier of fact must be free from bias or prejudice regarding the outcome of a case).

11
Irvine v. State Board of Equalizationgreen
calctapp · 1940 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 1983–1983
2 sentences

1983(Citations omitted.) 40 Cal. App.2d 280, 284-285 , 104 P.2d 847, 850 (1940).

1983(Citations omitted.) 40 Cal. App.2d 280, 284-285 , 104 P.2d 847, 850 (1940).

11
Ernest W. Hahn, Inc. v. County Assessorgreen
nmctapp · 1975 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 1983–1983
1 sentence

1983See In re Miller, 88 N.M. 492 , 542 P.2d 1182 , cert. denied, 89 N.M. 5 , 546 P.2d 70 (1975).

11
Matter of Protest of Millergreen
nmctapp · 1975 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 1983–1983
1 sentence

1983See In re Miller, 88 N.M. 492 , 542 P.2d 1182 , cert. denied, 89 N.M. 5 , 546 P.2d 70 (1975).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Mexico. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (8)

CaseCitedYears
Siesta Hills Neighborhood Ass'n v. City of Albuquerque green
nmctapp · 1998
1 sentence

2020In such proceedings, the council does not sit as a mini-legislature, as it functions in most matters, but instead must act like a judicial body bound by ethical standards comparable to those that govern a court in performing the same function.” Albuquerque Commons P’ship, 2008-NMSC-025, ¶ 33 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). {32} A quasi-judicial proceeding “carries with it important procedural consequences,” including due process protections “requir[ing] a fair and impartial hearing before a trier of fact who is disinterested and free from any form of bias or predisposition reg

12020–2020
Sandia v. Rivera green
nmctapp · 2002
2 sentences

2019Indeed, “[p]rocedural due process is a flexible right[,] and the amount of process due depends on the particular circumstances of each case.” Sandia v. Rivera, 2002-NMCA- 057, ¶ 10, 132 N.M. 201 , 46 P.3d 108 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see Buffington, 2004-NMCA-092, ¶ 31 (explaining that “[t]he nature of the hearing and review to be conducted by the district court will depend upon the nature of the objections being considered” (emphasis added)). {13} Additionally, “[p]rocedural due process requires a fair and impartial hearing before a trier of fact who is disinterested a

2019Indeed, “[p]rocedural due process is a flexible right[,] and the amount of process due depends on the particular circumstances of each case.” Sandia v. Rivera, 2002-NMCA- 057, ¶ 10, 132 N.M. 201 , 46 P.3d 108 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see Buffington, 2004-NMCA-092, ¶ 31 (explaining that “[t]he nature of the hearing and review to be conducted by the district court will depend upon the nature of the objections being considered” (emphasis added)). {13} Additionally, “[p]rocedural due process requires a fair and impartial hearing before a trier of fact who is disinterested a

12019–2019
In re Aaron L. green
nmctapp · 2000
1 sentence

2010See Rule 12-216; In re Aaron L., 2000-NMCA-024 , ¶ 11 12 (reviewing under the fundamental right exception the child’s due process argument 13 stemming from a probation violation hearing even though the issue was not 14 preserved). 15 Child had the unequivocal right to a fair probation revocation hearing before 16 an impartial judge.

12010–2010
State v. Pacheco green
nmctapp · 1973
1 sentence

2010See Orquiz, 2003-NMCA-089, ¶ 16 (reversing and remanding 16 the revocation of the defendant’s probation because the district court made an 17 unequivocal, definite finding on the record prior to the revocation hearing indicating 18 that the court had prejudged the defendant prior to the defendant having an 19 opportunity to be heard at the revocation hearing); Pacheco, 85 N.M. at 780 , 517 P.2d 7 1 at 1306 (concluding that to make arrangements for defendant’s incarceration with the 2 deputy warden prior to the probation hearing was a denial of his fundamental right to 3 a fair hearing because

12010–2010
City and County of Honolulu v. Market Place, Ltd. green
haw · 1973
1 sentence

2010See Orquiz, 2003-NMCA-089, ¶ 16 (reversing and remanding 16 the revocation of the defendant’s probation because the district court made an 17 unequivocal, definite finding on the record prior to the revocation hearing indicating 18 that the court had prejudged the defendant prior to the defendant having an 19 opportunity to be heard at the revocation hearing); Pacheco, 85 N.M. at 780 , 517 P.2d 7 1 at 1306 (concluding that to make arrangements for defendant’s incarceration with the 2 deputy warden prior to the probation hearing was a denial of his fundamental right to 3 a fair hearing because

12010–2010
Reid v. New Mexico Board of Examiners in Optometry green
nm · 1979
2 sentences

2007Procedural due process requires a fair and impartial hearing before a trier of fact who is “disinterested and free from any form of bias or predisposition regarding the outcome of the case.” Reid, 92 N.M. at 416 , 589 P.2d at 200 .

2007Procedural due process requires a fair and impartial hearing before a trier of fact who is “disinterested and free from any form of bias or predisposition regarding the outcome of the case.” Reid, 92 N.M. at 416 , 589 P.2d at 200 .

12007–2007
Drink, Inc. v. Babcock green
nm · 1966
2 sentences

1983In Drink, Inc. v. Babcock, 77 N.M. at 280 , 421 P.2d at 800 , this Court stated that "when the manufacture and sale of liquor is lawful, as it is under our laws, statutes providing for the regulation of the business are limited by constitutional guaranties * * *" This was also noted by the California appellate court in Irvine v. State Board of Equalization when they stated: [U]nder the American system of justice it is the policy of our law that a person should not be deprived even of a "permit" *958 to engage in a legitimate business without a fair and impartial hearing and without an opportun

1983In Drink, Inc. v. Babcock, 77 N.M. at 280 , 421 P.2d at 800 , this Court stated that "when the manufacture and sale of liquor is lawful, as it is under our laws, statutes providing for the regulation of the business are limited by constitutional guaranties * * *" This was also noted by the California appellate court in Irvine v. State Board of Equalization when they stated: [U]nder the American system of justice it is the policy of our law that a person should not be deprived even of a "permit" *958 to engage in a legitimate business without a fair and impartial hearing and without an opportun

11983–1983
In Matter of Bailey green
nm · 1981
2 sentences

1982Fair Hearing The Companies rely on Kerr-McGee Nuclear Corporation v. New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board, 97 N.M. 88 , 637 P.2d 38 (Ct.App.1981) (Wood, Specially Concurring), for their argument that the regulations are invalid because the Companies were not given a fair and impartial hearing.

1982Fair Hearing The Companies rely on Kerr-McGee Nuclear Corporation v. New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board, 97 N.M. 88 , 637 P.2d 38 (Ct.App.1981) (Wood, Specially Concurring), for their argument that the regulations are invalid because the Companies were not given a fair and impartial hearing.

11982–1982

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NM § N.M. Stat. § 38-6-4 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

NY 95 (1914–2020) IL 83 (1942–2026) CA 41 (1933–2024) FL 28 (1989–2023) AZ 19 (1922–2022) PA 18 (1952–2025) OH 18 (1953–2025) NJ 17 (1949–2024) NM 16 (1982–2020) TX 15 (1885–2025) OK 14 (1926–2023) SD 13 (1980–2018) WI 11 (1940–2023) WA 9 (1912–2024) MO 9 (1942–2007) RI 9 (1963–2021) GA 9 (1935–2004) CT 7 (1970–2002) NC 7 (1986–2025) MS 7 (1977–2012) AL 6 (1937–1987) ND 6 (1988–2019) SC 6 (1961–2015) IN 6 (1972–2003) MD 6 (1973–2001) KS 6 (1973–2015) LA 6 (1999–2021) ID 6 (1923–1993) MI 6 (1968–2003) VT 5 (1988–2025) MA 5 (1918–2003) CO 5 (1953–1987) WY 4 (1976–2022) MN 4 (1947–2005) AK 4 (1983–2024) HI 4 (1980–2011) IA 4 (1944–2012) NH 3 (1995–2000) NE 3 (1930–1974) MT 3 (1956–1980) ME 3 (1970–2026) OR 3 (1977–1992) TN 2 (1969–2022) NV 2 (1970–1986) AR 2 (2003–2012) DE 2 (2023–2024)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check