 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Henderson, Docket No. 24,850,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, February 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Robbery victim's preliminary hearing testimony was properly admitted into evidence during defendant's trial under N.M. R. Ann. 11-804(B)(1) because defendant had an opportunity and similar motive to cross-examine the victim during the preliminary hearing as he would have at trial.
|
|||||
| State v. Salazar, Docket No. 24,468,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, February 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: N.M. Stat. Ann. § 33-2-34 (1988) was applicable to defendant's convictions for two counts of criminal sexual penetration of a minor because the verdict was inadequate to support a conclusion that defendant committed an act occurring after July 1, 1999. Thus, the earlier version was applicable and he was entitled to credit under that version.
|
|||||
| Smith v. City of Santa Fe, Docket No. 24,801,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, February 16, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court erred in concluding that N.M. Stat. Ann. § 72-12-1, coupled with the language of a permit from the Office of the State Engineer, evinced an intent to negate municipal home rule authority to prohibit drilling domestic water wells. Moreover, Santa Fe was not implicitly preempted from prohibiting domestic wells by state statute.
|
|||||
| State v. Martinez, Docket No. 28,623,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO, February 16, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was no probable cause supporting the murder-of-a-witness aggravating factor under N.M. Stat. Ann. § 31-20A-5(G) where it appeared that the victim was killed very quickly after confronting defendant, leaving defendant little time to form the specific intent to kill for the purpose of silencing a witness.
|
|||||
| State v. Ryan, Docket No. 24,013,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, February 16, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Videotapes of defendant engaging in sex acts with victim who appeared to be unconscious were properly seized because he did not have a subjective expectation of privacy in the room in the bunkhouse in which he routinely slept. Also, victim's consent to search all of the bunkhouse was valid. Thus, defendant's motion to suppress was properly denied.
|
|||||
| State v. Treadway, Docket No. 26,218,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO, February 16, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was insufficient to support specific intent for murder of a witness aggravator, N.M. Stat. Ann. § 31-20A-5(G), showing defendant killed store owner to prevent him from reporting the robbery then in progress or to prevent him from testifying; there existed other plausible motives for the killing, and defendant's death sentence was reversed.
|
|||||
| City of Roswell v. Smith, Docket No. 24,272,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, February 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The evidence was sufficient to convict defendant of obstructing a police officer in violation of Roswell, N.M., Code § 10-48 as he had no right to refuse order to leave parking lot; arrest was legal as defendant committed crime in plain view of arresting officer. Prosecution in district court by assistant city attorney was not improper.
|
|||||
| Callahan v. N.M. Fedn. of Teachers-TVI, Docket No. 28,983,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO, February 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An appellate court properly reinstated vocational institute employees' claim against unions for breach of the duty of fair representation after the unions entered into a settlement with an employer without the employees' consent because the claim could be interpreted to include a breach based on arbitrary, fraudulent, or bad faith conduct.
|
|||||
| Edward Family L.P. v. Brown, Docket No. 25,303,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, February 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court erred as it did not originally determine arbitration was proper as to all entities that would be involved in arbitration, but instead referred that issue to the arbitration panel, and it did not subsequently address that issue after the arbitration panel ruled; therefore, the court also erred when it confirmed the arbitration award.
|
|||||
| Hurley v. Village of Ruidoso, Docket No. 25,572,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, February 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred when it found that a village's claim of a lien for water and sewer fees was not time barred under N.M. Stat. Ann. § 37-1-4 (1880); the village was a "body corporate or politic" under N.M. Stat. Ann. § 3-18-1 (1972), and N.M. Stat. Ann. § 37-1-19 expressly stated that statutes of limitations applied to bodies corporate or politic.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
