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.
7 New Mexico opinions name it 1 courts 2007–2024 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. Reyesgreen2 sentences2022See State v. Reyes, 2002-NMSC-024, ¶¶ 41-42 , 132 N.M. 576 , 52 P.3d 948 , abrogated on other grounds by Allen v. LeMaster, 2012-NMSC-001, ¶ 36 , 267 P.3d 806 ; see also State v. Cunningham, 2000-NMSC-009, ¶ 12 , 128 N.M. 711 , 998 P.2d 176 . 2022See State v. Reyes, 2002-NMSC-024, ¶¶ 41-42 , 132 N.M. 576 , 52 P.3d 948 , abrogated on other grounds by Allen v. LeMaster, 2012-NMSC-001, ¶ 36 , 267 P.3d 806 ; see also State v. Cunningham, 2000-NMSC-009, ¶ 12 , 128 N.M. 711 , 998 P.2d 176 . | 2 | 4 |
Allen v. LeMastergreen2 sentences2022See State v. Reyes, 2002-NMSC-024, ¶¶ 41-42 , 132 N.M. 576 , 52 P.3d 948 , abrogated on other grounds by Allen v. LeMaster, 2012-NMSC-001, ¶ 36 , 267 P.3d 806 ; State v. Cunningham, 2000-NMSC-009, ¶ 12 , 128 N.M. 711 , 998 P.2d 176 . 2022See State v. Reyes, 2002-NMSC-024, ¶¶ 41-42 , 132 N.M. 576 , 52 P.3d 948 , abrogated on other grounds by Allen v. LeMaster, 2012-NMSC-001, ¶ 36 , 267 P.3d 806 ; see also State v. Cunningham, 2000-NMSC-009, ¶ 12 , 128 N.M. 711 , 998 P.2d 176 . | 2 | 2 |
State v. Cunninghamgreen2 sentences2024Appellate courts exercise discretion to review an assertion of fundamental error guardedly—“only where some fundamental right has been invaded, and never in aid of strictly legal, technical, or unsubstantial claims.” State v. Cunningham, 2000-NMSC-009, ¶¶ 12-13 , 128 N.M. 711 , 998 P.2d 176 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see id. ¶ 13 (further stating that fundamental error “goes to the foundation or basis of a defendant’s rights or must go to the foundation of the case or take from the defendant a right which was essential to his defense and which no court could or ought to p 2024Appellate courts exercise discretion to review an assertion of fundamental error guardedly—“only where some fundamental right has been invaded, and never in aid of strictly legal, technical, or unsubstantial claims.” State v. Cunningham, 2000-NMSC-009, ¶¶ 12-13 , 128 N.M. 711 , 998 P.2d 176 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see id. ¶ 13 (further stating that fundamental error “goes to the foundation or basis of a defendant’s rights or must go to the foundation of the case or take from the defendant a right which was essential to his defense and which no court could or ought to p | 1 | 5 |
| 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. Cortez
green
2 sentences2011State v. Cortez, 2007-NMCA-054, ¶ 5 , 141 N.M. 623 , 159 P.3d 1108 (“Appellate courts are to exercise discretion to review an assertion of fundamental error only in rare instances and solely to prevent a miscarriage of justice where some fundamental right has been invaded.”). 2011State v. Cortez, 2007-NMCA-054, ¶ 5 , 141 N.M. 623 , 159 P.3d 1108 (“Appellate courts are to exercise discretion to review an assertion of fundamental error only in rare instances and solely to prevent a miscarriage of justice where some fundamental right has been invaded.”). | 2 | 2011–2011 |
State v. Cortez
green
2 sentences2011State v. Cortez, 2007-NMCA-054, ¶ 5 , 141 N.M. 623 , 159 P.3d 1108 (“Appellate courts are to exercise discretion to review an assertion of fundamental error only in rare instances and solely to prevent a miscarriage of justice where some fundamental right has been invaded.”). 4 IV. 2011State v. Cortez, 2007-NMCA-054, ¶ 5 , 141 N.M. 623 , 159 P.3d 1108 (“Appellate courts are to exercise discretion to review an assertion of fundamental error only in rare instances and solely to prevent a miscarriage of justice where some fundamental right has been invaded.”). | 2 | 2011–2011 |