State v. Schwartz
New Mexico Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BUSTAMANTE, Judge.
{1} Bruce Schwartz (Defendant) asserts that his rights under the confrontation clauses of the United States and New Mexico Constitutions were violated when the district court permitted four witnesses to testify by two-way video over the Internet without the necessary findings that use of video was necessary. We agree and, because there is no reasonable possibility that the video testimony did not affect the verdict, conclude that the testimony was not harmless. Consequently, we reverse Defendant’s convictions. Concluding there is sufficient evidence to support…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Coy v. IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- State v. TollardoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2012
- State v. MoraNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1997
- Kersey v. HatchNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. GarciaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2005
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v.ThomasNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2016
- State v. TellesNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2019
- State v. Trevor M.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 2014
- State v. TellesNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2019
- State v. ThomasNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2016
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.