Skip to main content

State v. Duncan

Citations

  • 805 P.2d 621
  • 111 N.M. 354

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that evidence of defendant’s state of mind was of such import to the defense that excluding it constituted an abuse of discretion
  • evidence of coercer’s character was so important to defendant’s duress defense that it was an abuse of discretion to exclude it
  • evidence of coercer's character was so important to defendant's duress defense that it was an abuse of discretion to exclude it
  • “The term ‘element’ when used with reference to a defense means a ‘constituent part’ of the defense ... [, and] is synonymous with the term requirement’[.]” (citations omitted)
  • “Rule [11- ]405 deals generally with permissible methods of proving character and provides that when character is relevant it may be proved by testimony as to reputation or in the form of an opinion and, in cases to which Rule [11-]405(B
  • “Rule [11-]405 deals generally with permissible methods of proving character and provides that when character is relevant it may be proved by testimony as to reputation or in the form of an opinion and, in cases to which Rule [11-]405(B

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Montgomery, Baca, Franchini

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite 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.