{
  "id": 1586397,
  "name": "UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Donaldo A. MARTINEZ and Lawrence A. Tapia, Defendants",
  "name_abbreviation": "United States v. Martinez",
  "decision_date": "1984-07-21",
  "docket_number": "No. 15411",
  "first_page": "423",
  "last_page": "424",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "101 N.M. 423"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "684 P.2d 509"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.M.",
    "id": 8835,
    "name": "Supreme Court of New Mexico"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 52,
    "name_long": "New Mexico",
    "name": "N.M."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "24 A.L. R.4th 430",
      "category": "reporters:specialty",
      "reporter": "A.L.R. 4th",
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "137 Ariz. 53",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ariz.",
      "case_ids": [
        716130
      ],
      "weight": 4,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "56"
        },
        {
          "page": "899"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ariz/137/0053-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "59 Ariz. 184",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ariz.",
      "case_ids": [
        5145891
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1942,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ariz/59/0184-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "85 N.M. 521",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.M.",
      "case_ids": [
        2771729
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1973,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "526"
        },
        {
          "page": "45"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nm/85/0521-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "77 N.M. 551",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.M.",
      "case_ids": [
        2805369
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1967,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nm/77/0551-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "86 N.M. 52",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.M.",
      "case_ids": [
        2822028
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1974,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nm/86/0052-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "91 N.M. 434",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.M.",
      "case_ids": [
        1571116
      ],
      "weight": 4,
      "year": 1978,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "439"
        },
        {
          "page": "948"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nm/91/0434-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 279,
    "char_count": 3508,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.751,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.819276187101225e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4578728335126874
    },
    "sha256": "6f0259f5f24221d6f04e3506446a678a1bd57bfa7935c49ebc31082498141076",
    "simhash": "1:7b24b7ca2fa4608b",
    "word_count": 580
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:42:52.435207+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "SOSA, Senior Justice, and RIORDAN, STOWERS and WALTERS, JJ., concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Donaldo A. MARTINEZ and Lawrence A. Tapia, Defendants."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "OPINION\nFEDERICI, Chief Justice.\nThis case was certified to this Court by the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico. The issue before us is whether the pro se appearance as a party defendant of the Honorable Donaldo A. Martinez, District Judge of the New Mexico Fourth Judicial District, in a lawsuit pending before the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico constitutes the practice of law in violation of NMSA 1978, Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 5(F) (Repl.Pamp.1983). We hold that it does not.\nCanon 5(F) provides that \u201c[a] judge should not practice law.\u201d The Supreme Court of New Mexico has the exclusive right to regulate the practice of law. State Bar v. Guardian Abstract & Title Co., 91 N.M. 434, 575 P.2d 943 (1978); In re Patton, 86 N.M. 52, 519 P.2d 288 (1974). This Court has never fully defined what constitutes the practice of law. Each case is determined in light of its own facts. Sparkman v. State Board of Bar Examiners, 77 N.M. 551, 425 P.2d 313 (1967). The practice of law is usually interpreted to entail the representation of others. See 7 Am.Jur.2d Attorneys at Law, \u00a7 101 (1980). The illegal practice of law generally is found when \u201ca layman, as part of his regular course of conduct, resolves legal questions for another ****\u2019\u2019 Guardian Abstract, 91 N.M. at 439, 575 P.2d at 948. In State ex rel. Norvell v. Credit Bureau of Albuquerque, Inc., 85 N.M. 521, 526, 514 P.2d 40, 45 (1973), this Court stated that, inter alia, \u201crepresentation of parties before judicial or administrative bodies,\u201d or \u201cgiving legal advice and counsel\u201d would constitute the practice of law. Representing one\u2019s self in a legal proceeding does not constitute practicing law. See State ex rel. Frohmiller v. Hendrix, 59 Ariz. 184, 124 P.2d 768 (1942). In the case of Connor v. Cal-Az Properties, Inc., 137 Ariz. 53, 668 P.2d 896 (App.1983), the court held that lawyers representing themselves in a property action were not entitled to attorney fees since, by representing themselves, they were not practicing law. The court said, \u201cEven though the buyers in this case were themselves all attorneys, and carried out tasks ordinarily performed by lawyers, their activities did not constitute the practice of law because they represented themselves.\u201d Id. at 56, 668 P.2d at 899.\nIn addition, self-representation by a judge in a proceeding against him in another court is not incompatible with his judicial responsibilities and duties, nor does it violate public policy. A judge enjoys the Sixth Amendment right to self-representation in the first stages of a criminal action and a qualified right to appear pro se in a civil action. U.S. Const.amend. VI. See 24 A.L. R.4th 430 (1983). This right, coupled with the principle that self-representation does not constitute the practice of law, compels the conclusion that the Honorable Donaldo A. Martinez may appear pro se as a party defendant in a proceeding before the United States District Court without violating NMSA 1978, Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 5(F) (Repl.Pamp.1983).\nIT IS SO ORDERED.\nSOSA, Senior Justice, and RIORDAN, STOWERS and WALTERS, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "FEDERICI, Chief Justice."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "William L. Lutz, U.S. Atty., Jennifer A. Salisbury, Asst. U.S. Atty., Albuquerque, for plaintiff.",
      "Donald A. Martinez, Las Vegas, pro se.",
      "Donald D. Vigil, Albuquerque, for defendant Tapia."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "684 P.2d 509\nUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Donaldo A. MARTINEZ and Lawrence A. Tapia, Defendants.\nNo. 15411.\nSupreme Court of New Mexico.\nJuly 21, 1984.\nWilliam L. Lutz, U.S. Atty., Jennifer A. Salisbury, Asst. U.S. Atty., Albuquerque, for plaintiff.\nDonald A. Martinez, Las Vegas, pro se.\nDonald D. Vigil, Albuquerque, for defendant Tapia."
  },
  "file_name": "0423-01",
  "first_page_order": 457,
  "last_page_order": 458
}