{
  "id": 5360087,
  "name": "STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Monroe McAFEE, Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. McAfee",
  "decision_date": "1969-10-31",
  "docket_number": "No. 357",
  "first_page": "739",
  "last_page": "739",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "80 N.M. 739"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "460 P.2d 1023"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.M. Ct. App.",
    "id": 9025,
    "name": "Court of Appeals of New Mexico"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 52,
    "name_long": "New Mexico",
    "name": "N.M."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "80 N.M. 123",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.M.",
      "case_ids": [
        5359442
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nm/80/0123-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "78 N.M. 108",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.M.",
      "case_ids": [
        5322263
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1967,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nm/78/0108-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 119,
    "char_count": 1174,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.683,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 8.652310408375456e-08,
      "percentile": 0.49149448481359337
    },
    "sha256": "e78a1dea2f3c172f57bdbd2b1e16832d0131a83da0221023ce849cd7c582a2ca",
    "simhash": "1:85a1f846f90808b0",
    "word_count": 184
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:41:23.226975+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "SPIESS, C. J., and OMAN, J., concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Monroe McAFEE, Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "OPINION\nWOOD, Judge.\nDefendant\u2019s conviction and sentence was affirmed in State v. McAfee, 78 N.M. 108, 428 P.2d 647 (1967). Subsequently, he moved for post-conviction relief under \u00a7 21-1-1(93), N.M.S.A.1953 (Supp.1969). The trial court held that matters raised by this motion were decided adversely to defendant in the prior appeal. Defendant now appeals from the order denying his motion.\nThe'trial court correctly ruled that each of the claims made in the post-conviction motion were considered and decided in defendant\u2019s prior appeal. Issues raised and decided on a prior appeal may not be relitigated in post-conviction proceedings. Defendant is not entitled to a successive determination on the merits of the same issues. Nance v. State, 80 N.M. 123, 452 P.2d 192 (Ct.App.1969).\nThe order denying post-conviction relief is affirmed.\nIt is so ordered.\nSPIESS, C. J., and OMAN, J., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "WOOD, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "James F. Warden, Carlsbad, for appellant.",
      "James A. Maloney, Atty. Gen., Santa Fe, Oliver H. Miles, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "460 P.2d 1023\nSTATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Monroe McAFEE, Defendant-Appellant.\nNo. 357.\nCourt of Appeals of New Mexico.\nOct. 31, 1969.\nJames F. Warden, Carlsbad, for appellant.\nJames A. Maloney, Atty. Gen., Santa Fe, Oliver H. Miles, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0739-01",
  "first_page_order": 795,
  "last_page_order": 795
}