Legal Opinion
State v. Gunzelman
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided January 3, 1973No. 968PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HENDLEY, Judge.
Convicted of burglary contrary to § 40A-16-3, N.M.S.A.1953 (2nd Repl.Vol. 1972), defendant appeals asserting four points for reversal. Defendant’s contention on the failure to instruct on an essential element of the crime is dispositive of the appeal.
We reverse.
The court instructed the jury as follows:
“To constitute criminal intent it is not necessary that there should exist an intent to violate the law or to do a wrong. Criminal intent exists whenever a person intentionally does that which the law declares to be a crime, even though he may not know that he is committing…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. WalshNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1969
- State v. OrtegaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1968
- State v. BachichaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1972
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. GunzelmanNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1973
- State v. FuentesNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1973
- State v. PugaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1973
- State v. FuentesNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1973
- State v. BoyerNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1973
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.