Skip to main content

State v. Pruett

Citations

  • 22 N.M. 223

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. A motion for a continuance is addressed to. the sound discretion of the trial court which will not ordinarily be disturbed, especially in the absence of injury to the moving party. ■ P. 225</p> <p>2. The admission of an item of evidence which is immaterial and which, technically, is inadmissible, where it in no way reflects upon the guilt or innocence of the defendant, and is consequently not prejuidicial to him, is not sufficient cause to reve, le a judgment. P. 228'</p> <p>3. Evidence of the communication to the deceased of a threat of the defendant against him, is relevant, where, as in this case, the evidence for the prosecution as to the actual occurrence at the time of the homicide is entirely circumstantial, and where the action of the deceased, under the circumstances, was to be determined without the aid of direct proof, except as developed by the testimony of the defendant.</p> <p>P. 228</p> <p>4. Any witness may express an opinion, upon a nontechnical subject, based upon data which he has observed, when it is impossible by word of mouth or gesture to reproduce the data before the jury so that the jury may intelligently draw the inferences therefrom which the witness has drawn. The principle applies to opinions in regard to kneeprints of a man. P. 229</p> <p>5. Evidence of a meeting of witnesses for the prosecution to organize a' mob to hang the defendant, if it establishes such meeting,., is admissible to show bias and prejudice of such witnesses. But where such evidence fails to show such'meeting, it was correct for the court to strike it out on motion of the prosecution. P. 232</p> <p>6. Evidence that the deceased knew he would meet the defendant on the road at a certain place and that he went there armed is material and competent in a case like the present as reflecting upon the state of mind and probable conduct of the deceased when he met the defendant.</p> <p>P. 233</p> <p>7. The defense put upon the stand a witne

How courts have described this case

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

  • A trial error was not harmless because improperly admitted testimony was \highly prejudicial\ to the defendant.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Being, Hanna, Parker, Roberts

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

1 case in this archive is 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.