Legal Opinion

State v. Chakerian

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided May 11, 2015No. 35,121; Docket No. 32,872PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

VIGIL, Judge.

The question presented in this case is whether a defendant who was provided with a telephone book and access to a telephone for a period of twenty to thirty minutes in the early hours of the morning, was given a reasonable opportunity to arrange for an independent chemical test pursuant to the Implied Consent Act (the Act), NMSA 1978, §§ 66-8-105 to -112 (1978, as amended through 2007). We conclude that Defendant was not afforded his statutory right under the Act. We therefore reverse the judgment of the district court and remand to the metropolitan court for further…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. State v. AlbericoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1993
  2. State v. AlbericoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1993
  3. State v. ChouinardNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1981
  4. State v. SwansonMontana Supreme Court · 1986
  5. State v. MartinezNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2007

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. ChakerianNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2018
  2. State v. MaxwellNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2016
  3. State v. ChakerianNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2018
  4. State v. SmithNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2019
  5. State v. SmithNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API