{
  "id": 1551452,
  "name": "STATE v. NEWMAN",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Newman",
  "decision_date": "1926-06-08",
  "docket_number": "No. 3163",
  "first_page": "435",
  "last_page": "436",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "31 N.M. 435"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "246 P. 901"
    }
  ],
  "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": "31 N. M. 220",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.M.",
      "case_ids": [
        1551484
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nm/31/0220-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 137,
    "char_count": 1500,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.461,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.8172472706271035e-08,
      "percentile": 0.30222572821813165
    },
    "sha256": "5a1a6d7e42a2472e3a319d82f0dcf7b55b1dbeea4f338c5b9d14c5f3ce759343",
    "simhash": "1:ba9411328d3ae85c",
    "word_count": 255
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:07:31.532037+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "BICKLEY and WATSON, JJ., concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. NEWMAN."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "OPINION OE THE COURT\nPARKER, C. J.\nThe Attorney General on behalf of \u25a0the state has filed a skeleton transcript, together with' a motion for the affirmance of the judgment in this \u00a1ease for failure to perfect the appeal. The defendant was indicted, tried, and convicted for the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor under the provisions of chapter 118, Laws 1923. We had this chapter under consideration in State v. Armstrong, 31 N. M. 220, 243 P. 333. In that case we held the act to be unconstitutional and void. There is no law, therefore, under which the prosecution in this, case can be sustained. The whole proceeding and sentence must consequently be held to be without force and effect.\nIt follows that the motion to docket and affirm should be denied, and the cause remanded to the district court with directions to set aside the judgment and sentence, and to discharge the defendant, and it so ordered.\nBICKLEY and WATSON, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PARKER, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Robert C. Dow, Ass.t. Atty. Gen., for the State."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "[No. 3163.\nJune 8, 1926.]\nSTATE v. NEWMAN.\n[246 Pac. 901.]\nSYLLABUS BY THE COURT\nWhere a prosecution is had under an unconstitutional \u25a0\u25a0statute, the case will be dismissed in this court and the \u25a0defendant ordered to be discharged by the lower court.\nAppeal from District Court, Chavez' County; Brice, \u25a0Judge.\nW. L. Newman was convicted of the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor, and he appeals.\nMotion to docket and affirm denied, and cause remanded with directions.\nRobert C. Dow, Ass.t. Atty. Gen., for the State.\n[[1] 16C.1 1>. 65 n. 58."
  },
  "file_name": "0435-01",
  "first_page_order": 449,
  "last_page_order": 450
}