defendant must show error (New Mexico) · Go Syfert
← New Mexico issues

defendant must show error in New Mexico

8 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 2008–2026 4 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 (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Mexico.

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 (6)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Schoonmaker green
nm · 2008
2 sentences

2024In any event, Ulises clarified in his testimony that he did in fact believe that Defendant was going to shoot him when he saw the firearm spark. [BIC 9-10] {8} With respect to the battery conviction, Defendant claims that there was no evidence to support Guiselle’s testimony that she had been shot three times. [BIC 15] However, there was no need to prove that she was shot three times, since Defendant’s conviction only required the evidence to show that Guiselle had been shot once. [RP 313] Ineffective Assistance of Counsel {9} Defendant claims that defense counsel was ineffective. [BIC 16] In

2024In any event, Ulises clarified in his testimony that he did in fact believe that Defendant was going to shoot him when he saw the firearm spark. [BIC 9-10] {8} With respect to the battery conviction, Defendant claims that there was no evidence to support Guiselle’s testimony that she had been shot three times. [BIC 15] However, there was no need to prove that she was shot three times, since Defendant’s conviction only required the evidence to show that Guiselle had been shot once. [RP 313] Ineffective Assistance of Counsel {9} Defendant claims that defense counsel was ineffective. [BIC 16] In

52017–2024
State v. Consaul green
nm · 2014
2 sentences

2024In any event, Ulises clarified in his testimony that he did in fact believe that Defendant was going to shoot him when he saw the firearm spark. [BIC 9-10] {8} With respect to the battery conviction, Defendant claims that there was no evidence to support Guiselle’s testimony that she had been shot three times. [BIC 15] However, there was no need to prove that she was shot three times, since Defendant’s conviction only required the evidence to show that Guiselle had been shot once. [RP 313] Ineffective Assistance of Counsel {9} Defendant claims that defense counsel was ineffective. [BIC 16] In

2023Unpersuaded, we affirm. {2} In his memorandum in opposition, Defendant continues to assert that he did not knowingly or voluntarily plead guilty to battery upon a peace officer and resisting, evading or obstructing an officer, and he argues the district court should have therefore allowed him to withdraw his plea. [MIO 5] Specifically, Defendant argues that his guilty plea was the product of ineffective assistance of counsel because his counsel badgered him into signing the plea agreement. [MIO 6, 9] {3} In order to make a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel, “a defendant mus

52017–2024
State v. Smith green
nm · 2016
1 sentence

2026State v. Smith, 2016-NMSC-007, ¶ 62 , 367 P.3d 420 .

12026–2026
Lytle v. Jordan green
nm · 2001
2 sentences

2019To demonstrate that counsel’s performance was deficient, the defendant must show that defense “counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.” Lytle v. Jordan, 2001-NMSC-016, ¶ 26 , 130 N.M. 198 , 22 P.3d 666 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

2019To demonstrate that counsel’s performance was deficient, the defendant must show that defense “counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.” Lytle v. Jordan, 2001-NMSC-016, ¶ 26 , 130 N.M. 198 , 22 P.3d 666 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

12019–2019
State v. Boeglin green
nm · 1987
2 sentences

2018“Prejudice is shown when 14 there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result 15 of the proceeding would have been different.” Id. (internal quotation marks and 16 citation omitted). 17 {5} Defendant contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel as a result 18 of his attorney’s failure to discuss with him the question of “agreeing to the 3 1 submission of the lesser included offense of CSP II.” [MIO 2] He relies upon the case 2 of State v. Boeglin, 1987-NMSC-002 , ¶ 8, 105 N.M. 247 , 731 P.2d 943 (indicating 3 that “the defendant, not def

2018“Prejudice is shown when 14 there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result 15 of the proceeding would have been different.” Id. (internal quotation marks and 16 citation omitted). 17 {5} Defendant contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel as a result 18 of his attorney’s failure to discuss with him the question of “agreeing to the 3 1 submission of the lesser included offense of CSP II.” [MIO 2] He relies upon the case 2 of State v. Boeglin, 1987-NMSC-002 , ¶ 8, 105 N.M. 247 , 731 P.2d 943 (indicating 3 that “the defendant, not def

12018–2018
State v. Grogan green
nm · 2007
2 sentences

2008Grogan, 2007-NMSC-039, ¶ 11 , 142 N.M. 107 , 163 P.3d 494 .

2008Grogan, 2007-NMSC-039, ¶ 11 , 142 N.M. 107 , 163 P.3d 494 .

12008–2008

Where else courts name it

WA 42 (1982–2026) IL 39 (1997–2026) SC 32 (1998–2026) MI 28 (2015–2026) CA 13 (1889–2026) OH 12 (1994–2026) NC 11 (1949–2026) IN 9 (1993–2008) NM 8 (2008–2026) NJ 7 (2009–2021) AZ 7 (2009–2024) KS 6 (2020–2025) ND 6 (2000–2018) TX 4 (1984–2012) GA 3 (1985–1998) KY 2 (2024–2024) MO 2 (1993–1993) WI 2 (1978–1988) ID 2 (2014–2014) NY 2 (2013–2016) MA 2 (1983–2011) LA 2 (1987–1989)

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