Skip to main content

In re Smith

Citations

  • 25 N.M. 48
  • 176 P. 819

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Chapter 70, Code 1915, which provides for the issuance by a district judge of a commission in the nature of a writ de lunático inquiriendo to inquire into the lunacy or habitual drunkenness of any person within this state, or having real or personal estate therein, has no application to a person in the custody of the law awaiting' execution for a capital offense or as to a convict undergoing imprisonment for crime. Said statute was enacted solely for the purpose of protecting the civil and property rights of insane persons and habitual drunkards and for the care of indigent persons by the various counties. Hence an adjudication by a district court under such statute that a person who has been tried and convicted for the crime of murder and sentenced to death is a person of unsound mind is void, and does not have the effect to stay the execution. P. 51</p> <p>2. The common law forbids the trial, sentencing, or execution of an insane person for a crime while he continues in that state. Where a person has been convicted of a crime and sentenced to death, and, pending the execution, a suggestion is made to the court so passing sentence that the accused has become insane, and the court is satisfied from such suggestion that there is a question as to the sanity of such party, the court will, as a matter of humanity, make such investigation as may be necessary to become informed as to the sanity or insanity of such party. P. 57</p> <p>3. The court has the power to grant a stay of execution in such case for the purpose of enabling it to inquire into the sanity of one about to be executed. • P. 57</p> <p>4. The trial of the question of the sanity of a convict, suggested after the verdict and sentence, is at common law in the discretion of the judge, without an absolute right on the convict’s part to have the issue tried before a court and a jury. In this jurisdiction, there being no statute upon the subject, it is within the province of th

Judges: Hanna, Parker, Roberts

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

19 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.