Legal Opinion

Anaya v. State

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided December 27, 1968No. 189PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SPIESS, Chief Judge.

Defendant, Leo Anaya, has appealed from an order of the district court denying his motion under Rule 93 [§ 21-1-1(93), N.M.S.A. 1953 (Supp. 1967)] for relief from a judgment and sentence to imprisonment. Pie relies upon three points for reversal. The first relates to the sufficiency of the evidence upon which the trial court found that defendant was not an indigent and concluded that he was not entitled to court-appointed counsel at his trial held December 8, 1964. The second, as stated by defendant, is: “The Supreme Court for fche State of New Mexico erred in…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCannSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  2. United States v. Raphael PlattnerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1964
  3. State v. WilliamsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1967
  4. State v. WeddleNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Allsop Lumber Co. v. Continental Casualty Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1963

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Bryan v. BryanCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1982
  2. State v. MoserNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API