Legal Opinion
State v. Dickson
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided March 5, 1971No. 509PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WOOD, Judge.
We reverse defendant’s conviction of armed robbery. Section 40A-16-2, N.M. S.A.1953 (Repl.Vol. 6), because the trial court improperly admitted defendant’s incriminating statement.
Defendant was arrested in Oklahoma City and returned to Clovis, where he was tried. On the automobile trip to Clovis, he made incriminating statements. These statements were held inadmissible as evidence under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694, 10 A.L.R.3d 974 (1966). Within two hours after arriving in Clovis, defendant made another incriminating statement which was…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Bunting v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1967
- State v. GutierrezNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1967
- Commonwealth v. BanksSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
- State v. ChavesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1921
3Cited by12 opinions
- State v. MascarenasNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1972
- State v. JuarezNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1995
- State v. AtwoodNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1971
- State v. PadillaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1980
- State v. AustinNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1978
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.