 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bankers Trust Co. of Cal., N.S. v. Baca, Docket No. 26,010,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, December 5, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The bank's foreclosure action against the homeowners, which was dismissed without prejudice under N.M. R. Ann. 1-041(E)(2), simply left the action as though it was never filed and immune from a later determination that the dismissal was with prejudice and with res judicata effect. The bank was not prevented from filing a second action.
|
|||||
| Montgomery v. Lomos Altos, Inc., Docket No. 29,202,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO, December 5, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Developers' applications to change the point of diversion of surface water rights in the move-from location to groundwater rights in the move-to location, N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 72-5-23 and 72-12-7, was properly granted because it was uncontested that both locations were hydrologically connected within the same system.
|
|||||
| State v. Duarte, Docket No. 25,878,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, December 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Fact that the officer deviated from the script provided to him to use during sobriety roadblock by asking defendant if he had been drinking did not violate defendant's Fourth Amendment rights; deviation did not change detention from one of reasonable detention to one of unreasonable detention or require an individualized suspicion of intoxication.
|
|||||
| State v. Funderburg, Docket No. 25,591,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, December 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's Fourth Amendment rights were violated by a search of his car because, although an officer had reasonable suspicion to stop his car based on a report that a bad check suspect was inside, there was no reason to detain defendant after his paperwork was checked, and the suspect was identified as a passenger.
|
|||||
| State v. Maestas, Docket No. 29,178,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO, December 13, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the legislature expressly excluded judges from the application of the New Mexico Governmental Conduct Act, N.M. Stat. Ann. § 10-16-1 et seq., it was fundamental error to convict defendant, a municipal judge, of official acts prohibited under the Act.
|
|||||
| State v. Rivas, Docket No. 26,199,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, December 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The denial of defendant's motion to suppress in his criminal trial was improper under the Fourth Amendment because he was detained without individualized reasonable suspicion that he had committed, or was about to, commit a crime. He was going about his business and complied with requests to "step back" when told to do so.
|
|||||
| State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Dep't v. Browind C., Docket No. 26,196,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, December 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The termination of a mother's parental rights to her child was affirmed where the trial court did not err in reviving and reinstating an original neglect and abuse petition against the mother, there was no probable value in providing her with additional process, and there was a clear showing that further attempts at reunification were futile.
|
|||||
| State v. Weisser, Docket No. 25,079,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, December 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In sexual abuse case, N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-9-13, because there was no independent evidence to show the corpus delicti or the trustworthiness of defendant's extrajudicial statements regarding his abuse of his daughter under the Paris rule, defendant's charges could not stand, and the court therefore erred by denying defendant's motion to dismiss.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
