Legal Opinion

CITY OF AZTEC v. Gurule

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided January 25, 2010No. 31,480PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SERNA, Justice.

{1} This case permits us to reconsider a long-standing procedural requirement that has lost its usefulness in the twenty-first century. We hold that municipal ordinances are properly considered law, and thus need no longer be proven as facts necessary for a prima facie case, and we apply this rule to affirm Anthony Gurule’s (“Defendant”) conviction of aggravated driving while intoxicated (“DWI”), contrary to the City Code of Aztec, New Mexico. Aztec, N.M., City Code § 24-21.1 (2007) (“Except as otherwise provided in this article, the following sections of the New Mexico…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Garner v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  2. United States v. John Terrance Garcia, Phillip G. JackmanCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1982
  3. Padilla v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Apodaca v. AAA Gas Co.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 2003
  5. State v. FrawleyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2007

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. T.H. McElvain Oil & Gas Ltd. P'ship v. Benson-Montin-Greer Drilling Corp.New Mexico Supreme Court · 2016
  2. Kane v. City of AlbuquerqueNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2015
  3. Premier Trust of Nevada, Inc. v. City of AlbuquerqueNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2020
  4. State v. ValdezNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2012
  5. State v. KnightNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2019

12 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