Skip to main content

State v. Rodriguez

Citations

  • 23 N.M. 156

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Where a juror had an opinion as to defendant’s guilt, which he had formed from public rumor' as to what the facts in the case purported to be, but he unequivocally stated that he could and would lay aside his opinion and try defendant impartially on the evidence, he was a competent juror.</p> <p>P. 163</p> <p>2. No party can acquire a vested right to have a particular member of the panel sit upon the trial of his cause until he has been accepted and sworn. It is enough that it appear that his cause has been tried by an impartial jury. It is no ground of exception that, against his objection, a juror was rejected by the court upon insufficient grounds, unless, through rejecting qualified persons, the necessity of accepting others not qualified has been purposely created. P. 164</p> <p>3. There was no error in admitting a portion of the skull of the deceased, where pr'operly identified, for the purpose of illustrating the nature of the wound. P. 166</p> <p>4. The scope and right of the cross-examination are generally limited to subjects upon which the witness has been interrogated on direct examination. P. 168</p> <p>5.The trial judge may at his discretion permit a witness to be recalled, in order to be re-examined by the party recalling him. P. 170</p> <p>6. If the witness, upon cross-examination as to a former statement made by him relative to the subject-matter of the cause, and inconsistent with his present testimony, does not distinctly admit that he did make such statement, proof may be given that he did in fact make it; a proper predicate for the admission of such testimony having been laid. P. 170</p> <p>7. The flight or concealment of the accused raises no presumption of law that he is guilty; but it is a fact which may be considered by the jury, and from which they may draw an inference in connection with other circumstances, and in the absence of an explanation of the reasons of motives which prompted it, that he is guilt

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that jury may draw an inference of guilt from flight or concealment if the evidence is offered in connection with other circumstances
  • identifying factors, including concealment, as to which evidence may be 6 admitted to show consciousness of guilt

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hanna, Parker, Roberts

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

14 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.