Arnold v. State
New Mexico Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FEDERICI, Justice.
Three cases have reached us on appeal. They all arise out of the same cause of action and present the same issue and are therefore consolidated in this opinion.
Defendants were charged with restraint of trade contrary to § 57-1-1, N.M.S.A. 1978, by grand jury indictments.
The question presented for review is whether the State’s interception of the defendants’ conversations on the telephone violated the Abuse of Privacy Act, § 30-12-1, et seq., N.M.S.A. 1978.
Defendants filed a motion in the trial court to suppress the evidence obtained through telephonic interception.…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- State v. HogervorstNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1977
- State v. McHorseNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1973
- Winston v. New Mexico State Police BoardNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1969
- Trujillo v. RomeroNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1971
- City of Roswell v. New Mexico Water Quality Control CommissionNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1972
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- Buzbee v. DonnellyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1981
- General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. AnayaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1985
- State v. LujanNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1985
- State v. SinyardNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1983
- State v. FloresNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1982
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.