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.
6 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 1931–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Andradegreen2 sentences2019See 1998-NMCA-031, ¶¶ 2, 12-14 , 124 N.M. 690 , 954 P.2d 755 . 2019See 1998-NMCA-031, ¶¶ 2, 12-14 , 124 N.M. 690 , 954 P.2d 755 . | 2 | 2 |
State v. Bacagreen2 sentences2012See State v. Ruiz, 2001-NMCA-097, ¶ 47 , 131 N.M. 241 , 34 P.3d 630 (citing State v. Baca, 120 N.M. 383 , 390 n. 2, 902 P.2d 65 , 72 n. 2 (1995)). 2012See State v. Ruiz, 2001-NMCA-097, ¶ 47 , 131 N.M. 241 , 34 P.3d 630 (citing State v. Baca, 120 N.M. 383 , 390 n. 2, 902 P.2d 65 , 72 n. 2 (1995)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Ruizgreen2 sentences2012See State v. Ruiz, 2001-NMCA-097, ¶ 47 , 131 N.M. 241 , 34 P.3d 630 (citing State v. Baca, 120 N.M. 383 , 390 n. 2, 902 P.2d 65 , 72 n. 2 (1995)). 2012See State v. Ruiz, 2001-NMCA-097, ¶ 47 , 131 N.M. 241 , 34 P.3d 630 (citing State v. Baca, 120 N.M. 383 , 390 n. 2, 902 P.2d 65 , 72 n. 2 (1995)). | 1 | 1 |
Smoketree-Lake Murray, Ltd. v. Mills Concrete Construction Co.green2 sentences2000See Smoketree-Lake Murray, Ltd., 286 Cal.Rptr. at 447 . ("In reviewing the denial of a motion for new trial based on jury misconduct, the appellate court has a constitutional obligation to review the entire record, including the evidence, and to determine independently whether the act of misconduct, if it occurred, prevented the complaining party from having a fair trial." (Internal quotation marks omitted)). {56} Because extraneous information was presented, the burden shifted to the State to rebut the presumption of prejudice. 2000See Smoketree-Lake Murray, Ltd., 286 Cal.Rptr. at 447 . (“In reviewing the denial of a motion for new trial based on jury misconduct, the appellate court has a constitutional obligation to review the entire record, including the evidence, and to determine independently whether the act of misconduct, if it occurred, prevented the complaining party from having a fair trial.” (Internal quotation marks omitted)). {56} Because extraneous information was presented, the burden shifted to the State to rebut the presumption of prejudice. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Sacomangreen2 sentences2000See Sacoman, 107 N.M. at 591 , 762 P.2d at 253 . 2000See Sacoman, 107 N.M. at 591 , 762 P.2d at 253 . | 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. Tollardo
green
2 sentences2019However, when a defendant gives testimony “that ‘opens the door’ to inadmissible evidence, the doctrine of curative admissibility in some circumstances may permit the State to rebut that claim with otherwise inadmissible evidence.” State v. Tollardo, 2012-NMSC-008, ¶ 22 , 275 P.3d 110 . {48} For example, in State v. Andrade, where the defendant physically attacked the victim while committing aggravated burglary, the district court granted the defendant’s motion to exclude evidence of his prior arrests for battery and shoplifting pursuant to Rule 11-404 NMRA (1993). 2019However, when a defendant gives testimony “that ‘opens the door’ to inadmissible evidence, the doctrine of curative admissibility in some circumstances may permit the State to rebut that claim with otherwise inadmissible evidence.” State v. Tollardo, 2012-NMSC-008, ¶ 22 , 275 P.3d 110 . {48} For example, in State v. Andrade, where the defendant physically attacked the victim while committing aggravated burglary, the district court granted the defendant’s motion to exclude evidence of his prior arrests for battery and shoplifting pursuant to Rule 11-404 NMRA (1993). | 2 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Adam J.
green
1 sentence2015Section 32A-2-14(F); Adam J., 2003-NMCA-080, ¶ 6 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Blancett
green
1 sentence1931The contention is that the burden was on the state to rebut a presumption of prejudice, but this must be overruled on authority of State v. Starr, 24 N. M. 180, 173 P. 674 ; State v. Blancett, 24 N. M. 433, 174 P. 207 ; State v. Clements, 31 N. M. 620, 249 P. 1003 . | 1 | 1931–1931 |
State v. Starr
green
1 sentence1931The contention is that the burden was on the state to rebut a presumption of prejudice, but this must be overruled on authority of State v. Starr, 24 N. M. 180, 173 P. 674 ; State v. Blancett, 24 N. M. 433, 174 P. 207 ; State v. Clements, 31 N. M. 620, 249 P. 1003 . | 1 | 1931–1931 |
State v. Clements
green
1 sentence1931The contention is that the burden was on the state to rebut a presumption of prejudice, but this must be overruled on authority of State v. Starr, 24 N. M. 180, 173 P. 674 ; State v. Blancett, 24 N. M. 433, 174 P. 207 ; State v. Clements, 31 N. M. 620, 249 P. 1003 . | 1 | 1931–1931 |
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.