Legal Opinion

State v. Hood

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided January 16, 2014No. Docket 31,568PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HANISEE, Judge.

{1} At Robert Hood’s (Defendant) trial on charges of trafficking cocaine, the district court excluded, over Defendant’s objection, all members of the public from the courtroom during the testimony of an undercover officer. On appeal, Defendant contends that this courtroom closure violated his Sixth Amendment right to a public trial. Applying our Supreme Court’s recent decision in State v. Turrietta, 2013-NMSC-036, 308 P.3d 964, we conclude that the closure was unconstitutional because although the disclosure of an undercover identity may constitute an overriding interest…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Waller v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. United States v. Arnold Sherlock and Ronald CharleyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
  3. State v. TurriettaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2013

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. HoodNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API