Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

State v. Florstedt

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided October 10, 1966No. 7927PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

CHAVEZ, Justice.

Defendants-appellants, James E. Florstedt and Morris Sandel, were separately tried in justice of the peace court, found guilty of disorderly conduct as defined in § 40A-20-1, N.M.S.A., 1953 Comp., and appealed to th'e district court of Roosevelt County. The two' cases were consolidated for trial and again they were found guilty. Section 40A-20-1, supra, provides:

“Disorderly 'Conduct.—Disorderly conduct consists of : A. engaging in violent, abusive, indecent, profane, boisterous, unreasonably loud or otherwise disorderly conduct which tends to disturb the peace.”

On the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People v. . MostNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
  2. People Ex Rel. Clark v. Keeper of New York State Reformatory for WomenNew York Court of Appeals · 1903

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Fogarty v. GallegosCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008
  2. Buck v. City of AlbuquerqueCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008
  3. State v. DoeNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1978
  4. State v. SalasNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1999
  5. State v. James M.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1990

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API