New Mexico Supreme Court· 1/13/1984

State v. Worley

Citations

676 P.2d 247
100 N.M. 720

How courts have described this case

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

holding that the inferences that might have been drawn from the silence of a eodefendant not subject to cross-examination were cumulative of testimony provided by three eyewitnesses, and therefore harmless constitutional error
noting that the trial court instructed the jury not to consider prior statements made by the witness or the fact that the witness refused to answer certain questions
holding Confrontation Clause error harmless because evidence was cumulative
evidentiary ruling of trial court will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion
“Admission of evidence is entrusted to the discretion of the trial court .... ”
“Where an unconfronted witness does not form a vitally important part of the [s]tate’s case, no prejudicial error is shown.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Stowers, Sosa, Riordan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

36 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named State v. Worley

37 other CourtListener records share this case 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.