Skip to main content

State v. Brown

Citations

  • 676 P.2d 253
  • 100 N.M. 726

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that a verdict may be supported by direct or circumstantial evidence
  • stating that “[a]ny amount of penetration” with a penis “is sufficient to complete the crime [of CSP]” but failing to explain what part of the female genitalia must be penetrated
  • rejecting a Sanchez-based standard of review stated as, “whether a jury could reasonably find that the circumstantial evidence is inconsistent with every reasonable hypothesis of innocence”
  • rejecting the proposition that a court reviewing a conviction based on 8 circumstantial evidence must determine whether the evidence was “inconsistent with 9 every reasonable hypothesis of innocence”
  • stating appellate standard of review of sufficiency of evidence in criminal cases
  • “[m]atters affecting the witness’s bias or motive to testify falsely are to be attacked through cross-examination, rather than the exclusion of a witness.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Stowers, Federici, Payne

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

46 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

12 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.