Legal Opinion
State v. Ford
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided September 19, 1969No. 325PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SPIESS, Chief Judge.
Filbert Ford and Eugene Cordova, co-defendants, appeal from convictions of burglary (Sec. 40A-16-3, N.M.S.A.1953), and larceny (Sec. 40A-16-1, N.M.S.A. 1953). Each defendant is urging different grounds for reversal.
Defendant Ford relies upon a single point. He contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a mistrial as a result of the prosecutor’s comments to the jury indicating that Ford failed to protest his innocence at the time of arrest. We reverse for a new trial as to the defendant, Ford.
The arguments to the jury were not fully transcribed.…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Griffin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Griffin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Malloy v. HoganSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Hines v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1972
- State v. MalouffNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1970
- People v. AndrewsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
- State v. BrownNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1992
- State v. BeachumNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1970
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.