Skip to main content

State v. Larson

Citations

  • 617 P.2d 1310
  • 94 N.M. 795

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating that a statute is not unconstitutionally vague just because some marginal cases could be hypothesized in which doubts might arise
  • stating that a statute is not unconstitutionally vague just because some marginal cases could be hypothesized in which doubts might arise
  • stating that a statute 9 is not unconstitutionally vague just because some marginal cases could be 10 hypothesized in which doubts might arise
  • “We do not in any way believe that a person of ordinary intelligence would not understand which type of conduct is proscribed in Section 30-9-11 [criminal sexual penetration].”
  • if person consenting has common authority over premises, consent to search is valid

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Sosa, Easley, Payne

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

10 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.