Legal Opinion

State v. Romero

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided May 13, 2014No. Docket 32,531; Docket 32,598PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ZAMORA, Judge.

{1} This case involves two appeals from two separate criminal actions, involving the State and two different Defendants. Because these appeals share a common issue of first impression, we address them together. The issue before us concerns the effect of the pendency of a defendant’s post-judgment motion for modification of sentence upon the finality of the judgment. In light of recent developments, we conclude that the pendency of such a motion renders appellate review premature and dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction.

BACKGROUND

Smith

{2} Defendant was convicted…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Smith v. City of Santa FeNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Thornton v. GambleNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1984
  3. State v. AhasteenNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1998
  4. State v. SavedraNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2010
  5. State v. GarciaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1983

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Couch v. WilliamsNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2015
  2. State v. VanderdussenNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2018
  3. State v. GarciaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2021
  4. Barela v. DiazNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2016
  5. Rivas v. RomeroNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2016

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

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

Powered by the Exa API