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.
8 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 1972–2026 1 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. Hendersonred2 sentences2011See State v. Henderson, 10 116 N.M. 537, 541 , 865 P.2d 1181, 1185 (1993), overruled by Meadors, 121 N.M. 11 at 46-47, 908 P.2d at 739-40 . 2011See State v. Henderson, 10 116 N.M. 537, 541 , 865 P.2d 1181, 1185 (1993), overruled by Meadors, 121 N.M. 11 at 46-47, 908 P.2d at 739-40 . | 2 | 2 |
State v. Meadorsgreen2 sentences2011See State v. Henderson, 10 116 N.M. 537, 541 , 865 P.2d 1181, 1185 (1993), overruled by Meadors, 121 N.M. 11 at 46-47, 908 P.2d at 739-40 . 1998See State v. Henderson, 116 N.M. 537, 541 , 865 P.2d 1181, 1185 (1993), overruled by State v. Meadors, 121 N.M. 38, 46-47 , 908 P.2d 731, 739-40 (1995). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Verbruggegreen1 sentence2007Timoteo, 952 P.2d at 877 (Ramil, J., dissenting); see also People v. Verbrugge, 998 P.2d 43, 45-46 (Colo.Ct.App.1999) (holding that, because the statute of limitations had run, the trial court had no jurisdiction to enter a conviction even though the defendant requested an instruction on the offense). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Timoteogreen1 sentence2007Timoteo, 952 P.2d at 877 (Ramil, J., dissenting); see also People v. Verbrugge, 998 P.2d 43, 45-46 (Colo.Ct.App.1999) (holding that, because the statute of limitations had run, the trial court had no jurisdiction to enter a conviction even though the defendant requested an instruction on the offense). | 1 | 1 |
Bruno v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1972See Bruno v. United States, 308 U.S. 287 , 60 S.Ct. 198 , 84 L.Ed. 257 (1939), where the defendant requested the instruction on failure to testify and the failure to give the instruction was reversible error based upon an Act of Congress. 1972See Bruno v. United States, 308 U.S. 287 , 60 S.Ct. 198 , 84 L.Ed. 257 (1939), where the defendant requested the instruction on failure to testify and the failure to give the instruction was reversible error based upon an Act of Congress. | 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. Boyett
green
1 sentence2026On this point, State v. Boyett, 2008-NMSC-030 , is particularly instructive. {17} In Boyett, the defendant requested an instruction on inability to form specific intent due to mental disease or disorder, but the only evidence of the defendant’s mental disorder was the defendant’s testimony describing his organic brain damage. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
State v. Jernigan
green
2 sentences2015State v. Jernigan, 2006- 2 NMSC-003, ¶ 21, 139 N.M. 1 , 127 P.3d 537 . 3 {22} The first two prongs are readily satisfied. 2015State v. Jernigan, 2006- 2 NMSC-003, ¶ 21, 139 N.M. 1 , 127 P.3d 537 . 3 {22} The first two prongs are readily satisfied. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Romero
green
2 sentences2010The Court of Appeals reversed the defendant’s conviction, holding that UJI 14-5181 “is contemplated to be used in certain homicide cases” when the evidence reveals that “[t]he force used by defendant ordinarily would not create a substantial risk of death or great bodily harm.” Romero, 2005-NMCA-060, ¶ 13 , 137 N.M. 456 , 112 P.3d 1113 (internal quotation marks omitted). 2010The Court of Appeals reversed the defendant’s conviction, holding that UJI 14-5181 “is contemplated to be used in certain homicide cases” when the evidence reveals that “[t]he force used by defendant ordinarily would not create a substantial risk of death or great bodily harm.” Romero, 2005-NMCA-060, ¶ 13 , 137 N.M. 456 , 112 P.3d 1113 (internal quotation marks omitted). | 1 | 2010–2010 |
State v. Trujillo
green
2 sentences2004Id. at 213 , 510 P.2d at 1084 . 2004Id. at 213 , 510 P.2d at 1084 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
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.