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 1993–2019 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Xavier Carrillogreen2 sentences2018Sup. Ct. June 23, 2016) (nonprecedential) (holding "that the failure to instruct the jury on the essential elements of the predicate felony ... amounts to fundamental error requiring the reversal of [the d]efendant's felony murder conviction and remand for a new trial on that charge"); see also UJI 14-2810 NMRA (requiring the jury to be instructed on the essential elements of the felony alleged to be the purpose of a conspiracy); cf. United States v. Carrillo , 229 F.3d 177 , 184 (2d Cir. 2000) ("[C]onfusion and unfairness can arise from failure to charge the elements of the state law crimes c 2018Sup. Ct. June 23, 2016) (nonprecedential) (holding “that the failure to instruct the jury on the essential elements of the predicate felony . . . amounts to fundamental error requiring the reversal of [the d]efendant’s felony murder conviction and remand for a new trial on that charge”); see also UJI 14-2810 NMRA (requiring the jury to be instructed on the essential elements of the felony alleged to be the purpose of a conspiracy); cf. United States v. Carrillo, 229 F.3d 177, 184 (2d Cir. 2000) (“[C]onfusion and unfairness can arise from failure to charge the elements of the state law crimes c | 2 | 2 |
People v. Kentgreen2 sentences2017In order to find “possession” under this instruction, 6 the jury necessarily had to find that the possession was “knowing.” See People v. 7 Kent, 970 N.E.2d 833, 839 (N.Y. 2012) (noting that “[t]he exercise of dominion or 8 control is necessarily knowing” (alteration, internal quotation marks and citation 9 omitted)). 2017In order to find “possession” under this instruction, 8 the jury necessarily had to find that the possession was “knowing.” See People v. 9 Kent, 970 N.E.2d 833, 839 (N.Y. 2012) (noting that “[t]he exercise of dominion or 10 control is necessarily knowing” (alteration, internal quotation marks and citation 11 omitted)). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Gonzalesred2 sentences2005“The jury is presumed to follow the court’s instructions.” State v. Gonzales, 113 N.M. 221, 230 , 824 P.2d 1023, 1032 (1992). 2005“The jury is presumed to follow the court’s instructions.” State v. Gonzales, 113 N.M. 221, 230 , 824 P.2d 1023, 1032 (1992). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Aguirregreen2 sentences1993State v. Aguirre, 84 N.M. 376, 381 , 503 P.2d 1154, 1159 (1972). 1993State v. Aguirre, 84 N.M. 376, 381 , 503 P.2d 1154, 1159 (1972). | 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. Gonzales
green
2 sentences2019If the acts of two or more persons significantly 6 contribute to the cause of death, each act is a significant cause of death.]”—that is 7 to be given “if there is evidence that the acts of more than one person contributed 8 to the death of the victim.” Id. use note 4. 2019If the acts of two or more persons significantly contribute to the cause of death, each act is a significant cause of death.]"—that is to be given "if there is evidence that the acts of more than one person contributed to the death of the victim." Id. use note 4. | 2 | 2019–2019 |
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.