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.
9 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 1973–2023 3 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. Gainesgreen2 sentences2023See State v. Gaines, 2001-NMSC- 15 036, ¶ 5, 131 N.M. 347 , 36 P.3d 438 (“[W]hile an accused is entitled to instruction 16 on [the accused’s] theory of the case if evidence exists to support it, the court need 17 not instruct if there is absence of such evidence.” (emphasis, internal quotation 18 marks, and citation omitted)). 15 1 {27} We recognize that the defense-of-habitation doctrine was not raised below. 2 However, under the “right-for-any-reason” doctrine, the district court was 3 nonetheless correct to deny the instruction despite not weighing the defense-of- 4 habitation doctrine in i 2023See State v. Gaines, 2001-NMSC- 15 036, ¶ 5, 131 N.M. 347 , 36 P.3d 438 (“[W]hile an accused is entitled to instruction 16 on [the accused’s] theory of the case if evidence exists to support it, the court need 17 not instruct if there is absence of such evidence.” (emphasis, internal quotation 18 marks, and citation omitted)). 15 1 {27} We recognize that the defense-of-habitation doctrine was not raised below. 2 However, under the “right-for-any-reason” doctrine, the district court was 3 nonetheless correct to deny the instruction despite not weighing the defense-of- 4 habitation doctrine in i | 3 | 3 |
State v. Gardnergreen2 sentences2020Ortiz’s Entitlement to the Duress Instruction {23} “While an accused is entitled to instruction on his theory of the case if evidence exists to support it, the court need not instruct if there is absence of such evidence.” State v. Gardner, 1973-NMSC-034 , ¶ 22, 85 N.M. 104 , 509 P.2d 871 . 2020Ortiz’s Entitlement to the Duress Instruction {23} “While an accused is entitled to instruction on his theory of the case if evidence exists to support it, the court need not instruct if there is absence of such evidence.” State v. Gardner, 1973-NMSC-034 , ¶ 22, 85 N.M. 104 , 509 P.2d 871 . | 1 | 5 |
State v. Ortegagreen2 sentences2001Importantly, for purposes of this case, it has also been held that “[w]hile an accused is entitled to instruction on his theory of the case if evidence exists to support it, the court need not instruct if there is absence of such evidence.” State v. Gardner, 85 N.M. 104, 107 , 509 P.2d 871, 874 (1973) (citing State v. Ortega, 77 N.M. 7, 20 , 419 P.2d 219, 229 (1966)) (emphasis added). 2001Importantly, for purposes of this case, it has also been held that “[w]hile an accused is entitled to instruction on his theory of the case if evidence exists to support it, the court need not instruct if there is absence of such evidence.” State v. Gardner, 85 N.M. 104, 107 , 509 P.2d 871, 874 (1973) (citing State v. Ortega, 77 N.M. 7, 20 , 419 P.2d 219, 229 (1966)) (emphasis added). | 1 | 3 |
State v. Vargasgreen2 sentences2023See State v. Vargas, 2008-NMSC-019, ¶ 8 , 5 143 N.M. 692 , 181 P.3d 684 (“Under the [right-for-any-reason] doctrine, we may 6 affirm the district court’s order on grounds not relied upon by the district court if 7 those grounds do not require us to look beyond the factual allegations that were 8 raised and considered below.” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). 9 Affirming the district court’s decision on defense-of-habitation grounds does not 10 require us to look beyond the factual allegations considered by the district court 11 when it considered the self-defense jury instructi 2023See State v. Vargas, 2008-NMSC-019, ¶ 8 , 5 143 N.M. 692 , 181 P.3d 684 (“Under the [right-for-any-reason] doctrine, we may 6 affirm the district court’s order on grounds not relied upon by the district court if 7 those grounds do not require us to look beyond the factual allegations that were 8 raised and considered below.” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). 9 Affirming the district court’s decision on defense-of-habitation grounds does not 10 require us to look beyond the factual allegations considered by the district court 11 when it considered the self-defense jury instructi | 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Benally
green
2 sentences2019“While an accused is entitled to instruction on his theory of the case if 2 evidence exists to support it, the court need not instruct if there is absence of such 3 evidence.” State v. Gardner, 1973-NMSC-034 , ¶ 22, 85 N.M. 104 , 509 P.2d 871 . 4 {9} “The standard of review we apply to jury instructions depends on whether 5 the issue has been preserved.” State v. Benally, 2001-NMSC-033, ¶ 12 , 131 N.M. 6 258 , 34 P.3d 1134 . 2019“While an accused is entitled to instruction on his theory of the case if 2 evidence exists to support it, the court need not instruct if there is absence of such 3 evidence.” State v. Gardner, 1973-NMSC-034 , ¶ 22, 85 N.M. 104 , 509 P.2d 871 . 4 {9} “The standard of review we apply to jury instructions depends on whether 5 the issue has been preserved.” State v. Benally, 2001-NMSC-033, ¶ 12 , 131 N.M. 6 258 , 34 P.3d 1134 . | 2 | 2019–2019 |
Gardner v. New Mexico
green
2 sentences1980In State v. Gardner, 85 N.M. 104 , 509 P.2d 871 (1973), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 851 , 94 S.Ct. 145 , 38 L.Ed.2d 100 (1973), this Court, although it found no predicate in the evidence for the requested instruction, acknowledged the rule in the following language: While an accused is entitled to instruction on his theory of the case if evidence exists to support it, the court need not instruct if there is absence of such evidence. 1980In State v. Gardner, 85 N.M. 104 , 509 P.2d 871 (1973), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 851 , 94 S.Ct. 145 , 38 L.Ed.2d 100 (1973), this Court, although it found no predicate in the evidence for the requested instruction, acknowledged the rule in the following language: While an accused is entitled to instruction on his theory of the case if evidence exists to support it, the court need not instruct if there is absence of such evidence. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
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.