{ "id": 2777040, "name": "STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Edwardo ARCHULETA, Defendant-Appellant", "name_abbreviation": "State v. Archuleta", "decision_date": "1973-04-13", "docket_number": "No. 1104", "first_page": "146", "last_page": "147", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "85 N.M. 146" }, { "type": "parallel", "cite": "509 P.2d 1341" } ], "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": "403 U.S. 573", "category": "reporters:federal", "reporter": "U.S.", "case_ids": [ 12027357 ], "weight": 5, "year": 1971, "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/us/403/0573-01" ] }, { "cite": "378 U.S. 108", "category": "reporters:federal", "reporter": "U.S.", "case_ids": [ 6165107 ], "weight": 3, "year": 1964, "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/us/378/0108-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 307, "char_count": 4120, "ocr_confidence": 0.748, "pagerank": { "raw": 2.839741098080311e-07, "percentile": 0.8398200049500956 }, "sha256": "d4af419c3d75a467bdbd757eab1cd5eafc7ed21d77eb5c2a26ed3b430a23e093", "simhash": "1:eb98348068bdca28", "word_count": 644 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:38:26.265107+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [ "HENDLEY and SUTIN, JJ., concur." ], "parties": [ "STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Edwardo ARCHULETA, Defendant-Appellant." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "OPINION\nWOOD, Chief Judge.\nConvicted of unlawful possession of a narcotic drug \u2014 heroin\u2014defendant appeals. See \u00a7\u00a7 54-7-2 and 54-7-13, N.M.S.A.1953 (Repl.Vol. 8, pt. 2, Supp.1971). The issue is the validity of the application for a search warrant.\nDefendant contends the allegations in the application, which refer to probable cause, are defective as a matter of law. This portion of the application reads:\n\u201cDet. Dan L. Lundy of the Bern. Co. Sheriff Dept, states that he has a signed statement from a person who is willing to testify in a court of law if necessary, which states in part that he has personal knowledge that herion [sic] is kept inside the above residence & that he has recieved [sic] herion [sic] from the said residence on approx 10 different occasions. ...\u201d\nDefendant states: \" * * * There is absolutely nothing set out in the Affidavit from which the magistrate could conclude that the informant was credible or reliable. All the Affidavit contains regarding this informant are words or statements from him. There is absolutely nothing independent of the words of the informant from which the magistrate could conclude that these words or statements were credible or reliable.\u201d Defendant relies on the statement in Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108, 84 S.Ct. 1509, 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964) that the magistrate must be informed of underlying circumstances from which the officer concluded that the informant was credible, or his information reliable.\nUnited States v. Harris, 403 U.S. 573, 91 S.Ct. 2075, 29 L.Ed.2d 723 (1971) answers defendant\u2019s contention. In that case, the affidavit in support of a search warrant referred to an unidentified informant. As to this informant, the affidavit stated: \u201c \u2018 * * * [t]his person has personal knowledge of and has purchased illicit whiskey from within the residence described, for a period of more than 2 years, and most recently within the past 2 weeks, has knowledge of a person who purchased illicit whiskey within the past two days from the house. * * *\nUnited States v. Harris, supra, points out that affidavits for search warrants are to be treated in a common sense and realistic fashion; that technical requirements of elaborate specificity have no proper place in this area. A majority of the United States Supreme Court indicates that \u201can averment of previous reliability\u201d is unnecessary. Rather, the inquiry is \u201c * * * whether the informant\u2019s present information is truthful or reliable. * * * \u201d Referring to the informant\u2019s statements of purchases of illicit whiskey, four Justices of the United States Supreme Court state:\n\u201c . . . These statements were against the informant\u2019s penal interest, for he thereby admitted major elements of an offense under the Internal Revenue Code.\n\u201cCommon sense in the important daily affairs of life would induce a prudent and disinterested observer to credit these statements. . . . But here the informant\u2019s admission that over a long period and currently he had been buying illicit liquor on certain premises, itself and without more, implicated that property and furnished probable cause to search.\u201d (Emphasis added)\nHere, the informer\u2019s statement of ten different purchases of heroin at the residence is a declaration against the informant\u2019s penal interest. Although no time element is stated for the purchases, no contention was made in the trial court that the application was defective on that basis. Further, the affidavit states heroin is being kept at the residence. Applying the above quotation from United States v. Harris, supra, we hold that the affidavit was sufficient for the judge, to whom it was presented, to find probable cause for .the issuance of the search warrant.\nThe judgment and sentence is affirmed.\nIt is so ordered.\nHENDLEY and SUTIN, JJ., concur.", "type": "majority", "author": "WOOD, Chief Judge." } ], "attorneys": [ "Thomas E. Horn, Albuquerque, for defendant-appellant.", "David L. Norvell, Atty. Gen., Dee C. Blythe, Asst. Atty. Gen., Santa Fe, for plaintiff-appellee." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "509 P.2d 1341\nSTATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Edwardo ARCHULETA, Defendant-Appellant.\nNo. 1104.\nCourt of Appeals of New Mexico.\nApril 13, 1973.\nCertiorari Denied May 14, 1973.\nThomas E. Horn, Albuquerque, for defendant-appellant.\nDavid L. Norvell, Atty. Gen., Dee C. Blythe, Asst. Atty. Gen., Santa Fe, for plaintiff-appellee." }, "file_name": "0146-01", "first_page_order": 208, "last_page_order": 209 }