Legal Opinion · Concurrence

State v. Yates

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided July 25, 2008No. 27,290, 27,288, 27,289Published

1ConcurrenceCastillo, Judge

(specially concurring).

{18} I concur in the result of the majority opinion, but I respectfully disagree with the analysis. I write separately to address two issues central to the application of the six-month rule in the present cases. First, I do not consider the balancing test set forth by the majority to be consistent with the analysis currently set forth under New Mexico ease law. Second, I disagree with the majority’s assessment of State v. Lozano, 2008-NMCA-082, 144 N.M. 250, 185 P.3d 1100. I will address both issues together.

{19} I agree with the majority that in each of the courts of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Alexander v. Delgado Ex Rel. DelgadoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1973
  2. State v. HeinsenNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2005
  3. State v. NealNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2007
  4. State v. BoltonNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1996
  5. State v. CarreonNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2006

4 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