{
  "id": 2872360,
  "name": "STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lorraine SANCHEZ, Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Sanchez",
  "decision_date": "1976-12-22",
  "docket_number": "No. 2508",
  "first_page": "61",
  "last_page": "62",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "90 N.M. 61"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "559 P.2d 849"
    }
  ],
  "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": "420 U.S. 534",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "case_ids": [
        11644149
      ],
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 1975,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/420/0534-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "98 L.Ed. 362",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "L. Ed.",
      "year": 1953,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "74 S.Ct. 15",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "S. Ct.",
      "year": 1953,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "346 U.S. 842",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "case_ids": [
        6937656
      ],
      "year": 1953,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/346/0842-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "97 L.Ed. 1387",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "L. Ed.",
      "year": 1953,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "73 S.Ct. 1112",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "S. Ct.",
      "year": 1953,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "345 U.S. 970",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "case_ids": [
        372899,
        372741,
        372423,
        372875,
        372853
      ],
      "year": 1953,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/345/0970-04",
        "/us/345/0970-02",
        "/us/345/0970-01",
        "/us/345/0970-05",
        "/us/345/0970-03"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "109 N.E.2d 762",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1953,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "413 Ill. 437",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5314121
      ],
      "year": 1953,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/413/0437-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "432 F.2d 77",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "F.2d",
      "case_ids": [
        2224117
      ],
      "year": 1970,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/f2d/432/0077-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "490 F.2d 914",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "F.2d",
      "case_ids": [
        228600
      ],
      "year": 1973,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/f2d/490/0914-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "166 U.S. 138",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "case_ids": [
        3593110
      ],
      "weight": 4,
      "year": 1897,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/166/0138-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "93 L.Ed. 1897",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "L. Ed.",
      "year": 1949,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "338 U.S. 189",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "case_ids": [
        3945955
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1949,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/338/0189-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "396 U.S. 365",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "case_ids": [
        11334202
      ],
      "weight": 4,
      "year": 1970,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/396/0365-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 298,
    "char_count": 3358,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.823,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.0446031217563963e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7498105101880457
    },
    "sha256": "4df416f8663ad68724b67749460417c69bfcc4fd3d97f2e201a212c3ecce0ef6",
    "simhash": "1:16dd078006a29a10",
    "word_count": 559
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:34:48.706767+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "HENDLEY, J., concurs."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lorraine SANCHEZ, Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "ORDER\nWOOD, Chief Judge.\nConvicted of voluntary manslaughter, defendant was sentenced to serve a term of not less than seven nor more than fifteen years in the penitentiary. Defendant\u2019s notice of appeal was filed March 31, 1976.\nThe State moved to dismiss the appeal. A hearing on this motion was held December 22, 1976, at which counsel for the State and for the defendant appeared. The showing at this hearing was that defendant was committed to the penitentiary on March 30, 1976 and escaped from the penitentiary on September 10, 1976. Defendant\u2019s present whereabouts are unknown.\nThe question is whether \u201cthis Court should proceed to adjudicate the merits of a criminal case after the convicted defendant who has sought review escapes from the restraints placed upon . . . [her] pursuant to the conviction.\u201d Molinaro v. New Jersey, 396 U.S. 365, 90 S.Ct. 498, 24 L.Ed.2d 586 (1970).\nShould we rule on the merits of the appeal, our decision could not be carried out because defendant is not within the power nor under the control of this Court. There is no litigant before this Court \u201cagainst whom the Court may enforce its decision.\u201d Eisler v. United States, 338 U.S. 189, 69 S.Ct. 1453, 93 L.Ed. 1897 (1949), Frankfurter, J., dissenting. If we should affirm, there is no indication defendant would surrender to New Mexico authorities; if we should reverse and defendant should seek consideration by New Mexico courts pursuant to any such reversal, defendant would in effect be dictating the terms under which she will subject herself to New Mexico authority. In this situation, defendant is not entitled to a determination of her claims, and the appeal should be dismissed. Molinaro v. New Jersey, supra; Allen v. State of Georgia, 166 U.S. 138, 17 S.Ct. 525, 41 L.Ed. 949 (1897); United States v. Swigart, 490 F.2d 914 (10th Cir. 1973); Johnson v. Laird, 432 F.2d 77 (9th Cir. 1970); People v. Estep, 413 Ill. 437, 109 N.E.2d 762 (1953), cert. denied, 345 U.S. 970, 73 S.Ct. 1112, 97 L.Ed. 1387 (1953), reh. denied, 346 U.S. 842, 74 S.Ct. 15, 98 L.Ed. 362 (1953). See Estelle v. Dorrough, 420 U.S. 534, 95 S.Ct. 1173, 43 L.Ed.2d 377 (1975).\nIn reaching this result we have not overlooked N.M.Const., Art. VI, \u00a7 2 which provides \u201cthat an aggrieved party shall have an absolute right to one appeal.\u201d She was accorded that right but, by her escape, defendant abandoned the appeal. Allen v. State of Georgia, supra.\nThe appeal is dismissed. The dismissal is effective upon entry of this Order.\nHENDLEY, J., concurs.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "WOOD, Chief Judge."
      },
      {
        "text": "HERNANDEZ, Judge\n(dissenting in part and concurring in part).\nI agree that the appeal can be dismissed but am of the view that defendant should be given thirty days from the date of the filing of the State\u2019s motion in which to voluntarily submit to New Mexico authorities and if defendant does not submit, the appeal will be dismissed without further notice upon expiration of the thirty days.",
        "type": "concurring-in-part-and-dissenting-in-part",
        "author": "HERNANDEZ, Judge"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Jan Hartke, Chief Public Defender, Santa Fe, Reginald J. Storment, App. Defender, J. M. Scarborough, Espa\u00f1ola, Mary Jo Snyder, Santa Fe, for defendant-appellant.",
      "Toney Anaya, Atty. Gen., Paquin M. Terrazas, Asst. Atty. Gen., Santa Fe, for plaintiff-appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "559 P.2d 849\nSTATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lorraine SANCHEZ, Defendant-Appellant.\nNo. 2508.\nCourt of Appeals of New Mexico.\nDec. 22, 1976.\nCertiorari Denied Jan. 27, 1977.\nJan Hartke, Chief Public Defender, Santa Fe, Reginald J. Storment, App. Defender, J. M. Scarborough, Espa\u00f1ola, Mary Jo Snyder, Santa Fe, for defendant-appellant.\nToney Anaya, Atty. Gen., Paquin M. Terrazas, Asst. Atty. Gen., Santa Fe, for plaintiff-appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0061-01",
  "first_page_order": 97,
  "last_page_order": 98
}