Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
State v. Romero
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided January 17, 1980No. 3895Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSutin, Judge
I concur and dissent.
Defendant was convicted of Criminal Sexual Penetration (CSP) in the second degree in violation of § 30-9-ll(B), N.M.S.A. 1978 and appeals. I would reverse.
A. A lawyer must render adequate assistance for convicted defendant on appeal.
Defendant was sentenced 10 to 50 years imprisonment with 5 years suspended. In criminal cases where the liberty of a defendant is at stake, lawyers who fail to render adequate assistance on appeal should be placed on the rack with the sword of Damocles overhead.
Defendant’s Brief-In-Chief is of no assistance to defendant. State filed a motion…
2Cases cited56 opinions
- Ballard v. Superior Court of San Diego CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
- Johnson v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1975
- Forbes v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1977
- State v. SmithNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1979
- People v. GilbertCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.