{
  "id": 5332411,
  "name": "STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Albert G. ANAYA, Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Anaya",
  "decision_date": "1972-03-31",
  "docket_number": "No. 822",
  "first_page": "672",
  "last_page": "673",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "83 N.M. 672"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "495 P.2d 1388"
    }
  ],
  "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": "23 L.Ed.2d 469",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "L. Ed. 2d",
      "year": 1970,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "397 U.S. 436",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "case_ids": [
        12054849
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1970,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/397/0436-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "397 U.S. 387",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "case_ids": [
        12054506
      ],
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 1970,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/397/0387-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "69 N.M. 51",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.M.",
      "case_ids": [
        2786490
      ],
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 1961,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nm/69/0051-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "78 N.M. 623",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.M.",
      "case_ids": [
        5323740
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1968,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nm/78/0623-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "82 N.M. 531",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.M.",
      "case_ids": [
        5326550
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nm/82/0531-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 220,
    "char_count": 2419,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.677,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.1640517193070157e-07,
      "percentile": 0.5847356351663746
    },
    "sha256": "533ee41776e6d1fa1a0d150d6ecbd6431387bd3856a57b920cdf52c8048e3edf",
    "simhash": "1:1f5a34ec955c5121",
    "word_count": 393
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:09:20.437308+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "SUTIN and COWAN, JJ."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Albert G. ANAYA, Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "OPINION\nHENDLEY, Judge.\nDefendant filed a Motion for post-conviction relief (\u00a7 21-1-1(93), N.M.S.A.1953 (Repl.Vol.1970)) on the grounds that he was \u201ctwice placed in jeopardy\u201d since the crimes (theft from an auto and the Municipal Court charges) \u201call arose out of the same incident.\u201d The trial court denied relief without a hearing and defendant appeals.\nWe affirm.\nDefendant was convicted on two counts of theft from an auto. The convictions were affirmed in State v. Anaya, 82 N.M. 531, 484 P.2d 373 (Ct.App.1971). When the officers arrested defendant for the, thefts, he resisted arrest, struck an officer and damaged the police radio in the police car which was being used to take him to the police station. Subsequently, but prior to the theft convictions, defendant was charged, tried and convicted in the Albuquerque Municipal Court of battery,\u2019 resistr ing arrest and criminal damage. He .received a one year probation.\nThe constitutional principle thai no one shall be put in jeopardy twice for the same offense is broad enough to mean that no one can lawfully be punished\u2019twic\u00e9 for the same offense. State v. Baros, 78 N.M. 623, 435 P.2d 1005 (1968); State v. Quintana, 69 N.M. 51, 364 P.2d 120 (1961). If the several offenses are the same a\u00e1 where they arise out of the same transaction and were committed at the sam\u00e9 time; and were part of a continuous act, and inspired by the same criminal intent, 'which is an essential element of each offense, they are susceptible of only one punishment. State v. Quintana, supra.\nFactually, defendant\u2019s municipal court crime did not \u201carise out of the sam\u00e9 transaction\u201d as the subsequent district court crime of theft from an auto. See Waller v. Florida, 397 U.S. 387, 90 S.Ct. 1184, 25 L.Ed.2d 435 (1970), arid the concurring'op'irii ion of Mr. Justice Brennan in Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 90 S.Ct. 1189, 23 L.Ed.2d 469 (1970).\nThe order denying defendant\u2019s motion for post-conviction relief without a hearing! is affirmed. Section 21-1-1(93) (b), N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl.Vol.1970).\nAffirmed.\nIt is so ordered.\nSUTIN and COWAN, JJ.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "HENDLEY, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Malcolm G. Colberg of Butler & Colberg, Albuquerque, for defendant-appellant.",
      "David L. Norvell, Atty. Gen.,. Winston Roberts-Hohl, Asst. Atty. Gen., Santa Fe, for plaintiff-appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "495 P.2d 1388\nSTATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Albert G. ANAYA, Defendant-Appellant.\nNo. 822.\nCourt of Appeals of New Mexico.\nMarch 31, 1972.\nMalcolm G. Colberg of Butler & Colberg, Albuquerque, for defendant-appellant.\nDavid L. Norvell, Atty. Gen.,. Winston Roberts-Hohl, Asst. Atty. Gen., Santa Fe, for plaintiff-appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0672-01",
  "first_page_order": 798,
  "last_page_order": 799
}