State v. Ashcroft

New Mexico Supreme Court

State v. Ashcroft

252 P. 1001, 32 N.M. 209

CourtNew Mexico Supreme Court

DecidedJanuary 14, 1927

DocketNo. 3164.

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 252 P. 1001 (State v. Ashcroft) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Mexico Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Ashcroft, 252 P. 1001, 32 N.M. 209 (N.M. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OP TRIE COURT

PARKER, C. J.

Appellee was charged in the indictment with the crime of unlawfully receiving- and purchasing stolen property. He interposed a plea of former conviction for the same offense. The court sustained the plea and dismissed the indictment. Thereupon the state appealed to this court. A motion to dismiss the appeal had been filed on- various grounds, but only one ground need be considered. It is that the state has no right to appeal in cases of this kind. The matter is governed by section 50, chapter 43, Laws 1917, which is as follows:

“When any indictment, complaint or information is quashed or judged insufficient upon any interlocutory motion, or judgment is arrested, the district court may cause the defendant to be committed or recognized to answer another indictment, complaint or information, or an appeal to the Supreme Court shall be granted, if the prosecuting attorney desire it.”

This whole matter has been considered in Ex parte Carrillo, 22 N. M. 149, 158 P. 800, and in State v. Dallas, 22 N. M. 392, 163 P. 252. In both of these 'cases we held that the state has no right of appeal in a criminal case except as the same may be conferred by statute. The statute, under which these decisions were rendered, ivas identical with the present statute above cited, in so far as the scope of the right of the state to appeal is concerned.

It follows that the motion of the appellee t’o dismiss the appeal should he granted and the canse remanded to the district court, and it is so ordered.

BIOKLEF and WATSON, JJ, concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION OP TRIE COURT

PARKER, C. J.

Appellee was charged in the indictment with the crime of unlawfully receiving- and purchasing stolen property. He interposed a plea of former conviction for the same offense. The court sustained the plea and dismissed the indictment. Thereupon the state appealed to this court. A motion to dismiss the appeal had been filed on- various grounds, but only one ground need be considered. It is that the state has no right to appeal in cases of this kind. The matter is governed by section 50, chapter 43, Laws 1917, which is as follows:

“When any indictment, complaint or information is quashed or judged insufficient upon any interlocutory motion, or judgment is arrested, the district court may cause the defendant to be committed or recognized to answer another indictment, complaint or information, or an appeal to the Supreme Court shall be granted, if the prosecuting attorney desire it.”

This whole matter has been considered in Ex parte Carrillo, 22 N. M. 149, 158 P. 800, and in State v. Dallas, 22 N. M. 392, 163 P. 252. In both of these 'cases we held that the state has no right of appeal in a criminal case except as the same may be conferred by statute. The statute, under which these decisions were rendered, ivas identical with the present statute above cited, in so far as the scope of the right of the state to appeal is concerned.

It follows that the motion of the appellee t’o dismiss the appeal should he granted and the canse remanded to the district court, and it is so ordered.

BIOKLEF and WATSON, JJ, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

252 P. 1001, 32 N.M. 209, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-ashcroft-nm-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack