Legal Opinion

Pece v. Cox

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided November 2, 1964No. 7750PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Per curiam

The only new issue presented in this case and not passed upon in previous habeas corpus proceedings is related to whether petitioner’s statement or confession introduced at his trial, had been ruled to have been voluntarily given by the trial judge before it was admitted in evidence, or did the trial judge leave this issue to the jury.

Petitioner relies on Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 84 S.Ct. 1758, 12 L.Ed.2d 977. However, we are impressed that the proper rule to be applied is that announced in Crooker v. California, 357 U.S. 433, 78 S.Ct. 1287, 2 L.Ed.2d 1448, distinguished in…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Jackson v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. Escobedo v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  3. Crooker v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  4. Sanders v. CoxNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1964
  5. State v. MartinezNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1924

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. State v. ColemanSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1965
  2. State v. OrtegaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1966
  3. Lokos v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1965
  4. The PEOPLE v. KeesIllinois Supreme Court · 1965
  5. State v. CummingsHawaii Supreme Court · 1967

26 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