Legal Opinion
State v. Sinyard
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided December 20, 1983No. 7179PublishedCited by 42 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
NEAL, Judge.
Convicted of larceny over $100.00, contrary to NMSA 1978, § 30-16-1 (Cum.Supp.1983), defendant appeals contending that after his sentence was partially suspended the trial court could not impose probation. Although not raised below or in the docketing statement his claim that the sentence is unauthorized by statute is jurisdictional and may be raised for the first time on appeal. NMSA 1978, Crim., Child. Ct., Dom.Rel. & W/C App.R. 308 (Repl.Pamp.1983); see State v. McNeece, 82 N.M. 345, 481 P.2d 707 (Ct.App.1971). We hold that the trial court could properly impose probation…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- State v. GarciaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1983
- State v. MabryNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1981
- State Ex Rel. Clinton Realty Co. v. ScarboroughNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1967
- State v. EllenbergerNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1981
- Arnold v. StateNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1980
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- State v. RiveraNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2003
- State v. TrujilloNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2002
- State v. TafoyaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. SparksNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1985
- State v. ChavarriaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2009
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.