State v. House
New Mexico Court of Appeals
1DissentArmijo, Judge
72. I respectfully dissent because I believe the trial court’s decision to grant a change of venue from Taos County was in accordance with law and amply supported by substantial evidence. In concluding that voir dire of a third venire in Taos County was a prerequisite to a change of venue, the majority attempts to eclipse all the other indicators of local prejudice and public excitement that were abundant in the record before the trial court. In doing so, the majority has stepped outside the permissible bounds of appellate review by independently weighing the evidence and substituting its own…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Sheppard v. MaxwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Rideau v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Mu'Min v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- People v. CooperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
- State v. NicholsTennessee Supreme Court · 1994
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.