Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Doe

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided December 21, 1983No. 15083; 7138Published

1Dissent

DAN SOSA, Jr., Senior Justice,

dissenting.

I respectfully dissent.

Under the majority view, any findings or conclusions of the children’s court need not be supported by specific reasons or findings, but only a cursory statement that the court “considered” evidence leading to its conclusion. This ruling will preclude any meaningful inquiry as to the specific findings or reasoning of the court that were paramount to its decision. The amenability of a child to treatment or rehabilitation as a child through available facilities is an evidentiary question. See State v. Doe, 93 N.M. 481, 601 P.2d 451…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. In Re GAULTSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Kent v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  3. United States v. Marvin J. ZylstraCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
  4. In Re SantillanesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1943
  5. Peyton v. NordNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1968

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API