 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| State v. Diaz, Docket No. 25,612,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, January 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State's motion to reenhance defendant's DWI sentence under N.M. Stat. § 66-8-102 after he had already been released on probation was properly denied because reasoning applicable to habitual offender enhancements did not apply and because defendant had reasonable expectation of finality in his sentence.
|
|||||
| State ex rel. Bd. of County Comm'rs v. Williams, Docket No. 25,819,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Issuance of writ of mandamus requiring New Mexico Corrections Department to pay for costs of housing parolees in county jails was proper because N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 31-18-15(C), 31-21-10(C), 31-20-2(A), 31-21-25(B)(1), and 31-21-14(A) mandated that the Department retain legal responsibility, including financial responsibility, for convicted felons.
|
|||||
| State v. Stephen F., Docket No. 24,007,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant was convicted of criminal sexual penetration under N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-9-11, a new trial was warranted because evidence of the alleged victim's prior sexual conduct and the punishment she suffered because of it should not have been excluded under the rape shield statute, N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-9-16, since it provided a motive to lie.
|
|||||
| State v. Davis, Docket No. 26,091,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, January 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court erred in dismissing a reinstated embezzlement charge against defendant for untimeliness as nothing in N.M. Stat. Ann. § 31-16A-7 indicated the legislature's intent to limit the State's ability to refile diverted charges or otherwise proceed with the suspended prosecution within the diversion period.
|
|||||
| Nakashima v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 26,155,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, January 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of the insurer where the policyholder's installment fees were not considered premium under the insurer's automobile insurance policy; the insurer was not liable for breach of contract based on N.M. Stat. Ann. § 59A-16-24(B) as the installment fee was not an administration fee.
|
|||||
| Maestas v. Zager, Docket No. 28,997,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO, January 23, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court improperly granted a physician summary judgment because the issue of whether the decedent's sister was reasonably diligent in identifying the cause of the decedent's death was a factual question for the jury. In addition, medical malpractice cases brought under N.M. Stat. Ann. § 41-4-15(A) were controlled by a discovery rule.
|
|||||
| State v. Salazar, Docket No. 29,456,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO, January 23, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's motion for continuance, N.M. R. Ann. 5-604, should have been analyzed by trial court using certain factors rather than relying on maintaining trial docket and defendant's speedy trial demand; after applying factors, motion should have been granted. Denial of the motion prejudiced defendant by denying him the right to develop a defense.
|
|||||
| State v. Aguilar, Docket No. 26,087,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, January 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an arresting officer had no information regarding theft of a vehicle, theft of specific temporary plates, or misuse of temporary dealer plates by a specific dealer or other individual, the appellate court did not agree with the trial court that the officer had a reasonable, articulable suspicion when he stopped defendant's car.
|
|||||
| Garcia v. Underwriters at Lloyd's London, Docket No. 25,985,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, January 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Underwriters' actual notice of a claim presumptively triggered a duty to defend, which could only be rebutted by a finding that the insured knowingly declined a defense, and summary judgment in favor of the underwriters was not appropriate because issues of fact existed as to whether the late insured's estate declined a defense.
|
|||||
| Grimes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Docket No. 26,634,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, January 29, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because it lacked evidentiary support for a finding that the worker disobeyed or violated any clear and specific employer policy that limited the scope of work he was authorized to do as a greeter that prohibited him from apprehending a shoplifter, the decision of the workers' compensation judge was reversed.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
