Legal Opinion

State v. Brakeman

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided July 2, 1975No. 1847, 1848 and 1921PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

WOOD, Chief Judge.

In each case, the defendant pled guilty and appealed. The appeals were consolidated because each appeal raises the same issue. That issue is directed to asserted non-compliance with paragraphs (e), (f), and (h) of the Rules of Criminal Procedure 21, as amended October 1, 1974. The amended rule has not yet been included in our compiled statute. The specific claim is that the trial court failed to follow certain provisions in Amended Rule 21 and, therefore, erred in accepting the guilty plea.

We do not answer the various contentions because they are raised for the first…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. VigilNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1973
  2. State v. WhiteNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1962
  3. State v. KincheloeNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1974
  4. State v. RamosNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1973
  5. State v. McClarronNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1973

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. BolenNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1976
  2. State v. CiarlottaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1990
  3. State v. DeSantosNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1978
  4. State v. HowellNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1979
  5. State v. BarberNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1989

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

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

Powered by the Exa API