Home/New Mexico Supreme Court/State v. Wise

State v. Wise

267 P.2d 992, 58 N.M. 164
CourtNew Mexico Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 21, 1954
Docket5726
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 267 P.2d 992 (State v. Wise) 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. Wise, 267 P.2d 992, 58 N.M. 164 (N.M. 1954).

Opinion

COMPTON, Justice.

Appellants were convicted in Lea County of the crime of breaking and entering a store in Hobbs, New Mexico, in the nighttime with the intent to commit larceny, and they appeal from the judgment and sentence.

Having crashed the plate glass window of the store, appellants were in the act of loading a safe, which they had taken 'therefrom, into an automobile, when their plans became frustrated by the approach of peace officers. They fled east from the scene, with local officers in pursuit. Shortly thereafter, they were apprehended in Texas by New Mexico officers and immediately brought 'back to New Mexico where they were later put on trial.

A single question is presented. Appellants contend here, as in the court below, that the court was without jurisdiction to try them on the criminal charge because they had been brought within the court’s jurisdiction by means of forcible abduction.

The weight of authority is against appellants. It is well established that where a person accused of crime is found within the territorial jurisdiction where he is •charged, the jurisdiction of the court where the charge is so pending is not impaired by the fact he was brought from another jurisdiction by illegal means. Numerous cases, both Federal and State, support the general rule. In re Application of Lee P. Mayes for Writ of Habeas Corpus, our No. 5471 recently decided, writ denied without opinion; Frisbie v. Collins, 342 U.S. 519, 72 S.Ct. 509, 96 L.Ed. 541; Ker v. People of State of Illinois, 119 U.S. 436, 7 S.Ct. 225, 30 L.Ed. 421; Mahon v. Justice, 127 U.S. 700, 8 S.Ct. 1204, 32 L.Ed. 283; Cook v. Hart, 146 U.S. 183, 13 S.Ct. 40, 36 L.Ed. 934; Sheehan v. Huff, 78 App.D.C. 391, 142 F.2d 81; Whitney v. Zerbst, 10 Cir., 62 F.2d 970; Wilson v. State, 25 Ala.App. 298, 145 So. 191; People v. Pratt, 78 Cal. 345, 20 P. 731; Ker v. People, 110 Ill. 627, 51 Am.Rep. 706, affirmed 119 U.S. 436, 7 S.Ct. 225, 30 L.Ed. 421; Jackson v. Olson, 146 Neb. 885, 22 N.W.2d 124, 165 A.L.R. 932. Kansas alone may be said to support a contrary view!.

We are of'the opinion the court had’jurisdiction to try appellants for the crim-; inal offense. The judgment will be affirmed- and, It Is So Ordered. ...

McGPIEE, C. J., and SADLER,-LUJAN and SEYMOUR,. JJ., concur.

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

Related

State v. Nysus
2001 NMCA 023 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 2001)
City of Farmington v. Benally
892 P.2d 629 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 1995)
Benally. v. Marcum
553 P.2d 1270 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1976)
State v. Millican
501 P.2d 1076 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 1972)
State v. Halsell
465 P.2d 518 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 1970)
State v. Cochran
447 P.2d 520 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1968)
State v. Losolla
442 P.2d 786 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1968)
State v. Martinez
441 P.2d 761 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1968)
State v. Sedillo
439 P.2d 226 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1968)
State v. Lattin
428 P.2d 23 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1967)
State v. Garcia
413 P.2d 210 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1966)
City of Roswell v. Leonard
386 P.2d 707 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1963)
State v. Barreras
328 P.2d 74 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1958)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
267 P.2d 992, 58 N.M. 164, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-wise-nm-1954.