Legal Opinion
State v. Smith
New Mexico Supreme Court
Decided January 19, 2000No. 25,728PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MAES, Justice.
{1} Defendant, Michael Gerard Smith, appeals the enhancement of his sentence under the habitual offender statute, NMSA 1978, § 31-18-17(D) (1993). Defendant argues that the State must prove the existence of a prior conviction beyond a reasonable doubt and that the State failed to meet its burden in this case. The Court of Appeals certified this appeal as a matter involving an issue of substantial public importance, and we accepted certification. See NMSA 1978, § 34-5-14(0(2) (1966). The Court of Appeals certified the following question: “What is the burden of proof the…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Addington v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- McMillan v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. WattsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Parke v. RaleySupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- State v. GomezNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1997
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- State v. ElliottNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2001
- State v. HouseNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2001
- State v. SimmonsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2006
- State v. BullcomingNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2008
- State v. SedilloNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2001
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.