Legal Opinion

State v. Bearly

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided March 7, 1991No. 12240PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HARTZ, Judge.

Defendant was convicted of driving while intoxicated and of failure to maintain a traffic lane. He contends that he was denied his constitutional right to counsel, was denied his statutory right to make telephone calls after his incarceration, and was denied statutory and constitutional rights relating to release on bond. He argues that his convictions should be reversed because the violation of these rights caused him not to obtain a blood-alcohol test that could have been used in his defense.

We dispose of two matters summarily. First, because defendant fails to show, or…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. California v. TrombettaSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Arizona v. YoungbloodSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. United States v. MorrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  4. City of Tacoma v. HeaterWashington Supreme Court · 1966
  5. State v. HillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. GardnerNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1998
  2. State v. JonesNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1998
  3. Plummer v. DevoreNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1992
  4. State v. HastingsNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1993
  5. State v. Montoya State v. YapNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2016

2 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