State v. Espinosa

How courts have described this case

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

• damaging statements could have been prevented by diligence of defense counsel
• trial court did not abuse its discretion by prohibiting inquiry during voir dire into issues of pure law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Reynolds
  New Mexico Court of Appeals· 1990-11-15· cited 65×
• State v. Neely
  New Mexico Supreme Court· 1991-09-20· cited 43×
• State v. Porras-Fuerte
  New Mexico Court of Appeals· 1994-12-16· cited 29×
• State v. Villanueva
  New Mexico Court of Appeals· 1990-04-24· cited 25×
• State v. Chavez
  New Mexico Court of Appeals· 1993-03-30· cited 5×

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Tanton
  New Mexico Supreme Court· 1975-09-30· cited 74×
• State v. Kendall
  New Mexico Court of Appeals· 1977-01-04· cited 40×
• Kendall v. State
  New Mexico Supreme Court· 1977-03-09· cited 31×
• Loyd Carroll Grandsinger v. United States
  Tenth Circuit· 1964-05-22· cited 25×
• State v. Trujillo
  New Mexico Supreme Court· 1982-11-30· cited 23×
• State v. Ellis
  New Mexico Court of Appeals· 1975-06-18· cited 16×
• Casaus v. State
  New Mexico Supreme Court· 1980-02-25· cited 9×
• State v. Nichols
  New Mexico Supreme Court· 1986-04-07· cited 4×