Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Chakerian

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided May 11, 2015No. 35,121; Docket No. 32,872Published

1DissentZamora, J.

I agree that Section 66-8-109(B), as written, does not provide a defendant with a meaningful opportunity to arrange for and effectuate the timely performance of an independent chemical test. However, it is a function of our Legislature to make it so and revise the statute accordingly. For these reasons, I respectfully dissent.

The issue before this Court is whether providing Defendant with the Yellow Pages phone book and access to a telephone for a period of twenty to thirty minutes in the early hours of the morning meant that Defendantwas given a reasonable, as opposed to meaningful,…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Key v. Chrysler Motors Corp.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1996
  2. High Ridge Hinkle Joint Venture v. City of AlbuquerqueNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Marbob Energy Corp. v. New Mexico Oil Conservation CommissionNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2009
  4. Miller v. New Mexico Department of TransportationNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1987
  5. Commonwealth v. AlanoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1983

10 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