New Mexico Court of Appeals· 3/6/1990
State v. Cotton
Citations
- 790 P.2d 1050
- 109 N.M. 769
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 completed communication is required for a solicitation conviction, but suggesting that the solicitor may be prosecuted for an attempt to solicit
- holding that a completed communication is required for a solicitation conviction, but suggesting that the solicitor may be prosecuted for an attempt to solicit
- “The offenses of solicitation and attempt are analytically distinct in their elements because solicitation unlike attempt, is in the nature of preparation to commit an offense, rather than an act or acts in furtherance of the offense attempted.”
- “The offenses of solicitation and attempt are analytically distinct in their elements because solicitation unlike attempt, is in the nature of preparation to commit an offense, rather than an act or acts in furtherance of the offense attempted.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Donnelly, Alarid, Apodaca
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
12 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. UngartenNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1993-06-10· cited 46×
- State v. AndujarSupreme Court of Rhode Island· 2006-05-24· cited 33×
- State v. GreenNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1993-09-21· cited 32×
- State v. OlguinNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1994-06-07· cited 26×
- Resolution Trust Corp. v. BinfordNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1992-12-17· cited 25×
- State v. MARIANO R.New Mexico Court of Appeals· 1997-02-24· cited 20×
- People v. SaephanhCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2000-04-28· cited 14×
- People v. BoyceIllinois Supreme Court· 2015-03-31· cited 14×
- State v. ArchuletaNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1994-06-01· cited 13×
- Church's Fried Chicken No. 1040 v. HansonNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1992-10-15· cited 12×
- State v. LeeCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1991-01-23· cited 9×
- State v. FoxNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 2016-12-20· cited 1×
Cites
16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. LankfordNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1978-07-25· cited 111×
- State v. SegottaNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1983-11-17· cited 85×
- State v. BrownNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1984-01-13· cited 74×
- Jewell v. SeidenbergNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1970-11-16· cited 73×
- State Ex Rel. Bird v. ApodacaNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1977-12-28· cited 71×
- State v. CastenedaNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1982-02-25· cited 64×
- Gervin v. StateTennessee Supreme Court· 1963-10-11· cited 54×
- State v. RomeroNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1960-05-27· cited 46×
- State v. TovarNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1982-09-30· cited 42×
- Smith MacHinery Corp. v. Hesston, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court· 1985-01-21· cited 33×
- State v. SegottaNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1983-05-05· cited 32×
- State of Ga. v. DavisSupreme Court of Georgia· 1980-12-02· cited 29×
- State v. LopezNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1969-11-21· cited 26×
- State v. GilbertNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1982-04-22· cited 17×
- People v. BloomAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1912-02-02· cited 10×
- State v. FlowersNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1971-09-27· cited 7×
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.