Legal Opinion
State v. Quintana
New Mexico Supreme Court
Decided January 25, 2008No. 29,909PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CHÁVEZ, Chief Justice.
{1} Defendant James Quintana, an enrolled member of Cochiti Pueblo, is alleged to have committed crimes arising from an automobile accident on State Road 16. It is undisputed that State Road 16, while bordering Santo Domingo Pueblo and Cochiti Pueblo, is not within the exterior boundaries of either pueblo. The question in this case is whether State Road 16 is “Indian country” for purposes of criminal jurisdiction. If the answer is yes, then the State of New Mexico does not have criminal jurisdiction over Defendant. In a thorough and well-reasoned opinion, the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Alaska v. Native Village of Venetie Tribal GovernmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- State v. FrankNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2002
- State v. RomeroNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2006
- State v. DickNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1999
- State v. QuintanaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2006
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. HarrisonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. VandeverNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2012
- State v. Steven B.New Mexico Supreme Court · 2015
- State v. Steven B.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 2013
- State v. Steven B.New Mexico Supreme Court · 2013
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.