Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

STATE v. DUNLAP

Supreme Court of New Mexico.
Dec 14, 1925
Judgment
Subsequent
References
CaseIQ
Case Information
CITATION CODES
citation codes
DOCKET NO.

Nos. 2968, 2969, 2979, 2983, 2993, 3040, 3041.

Attorney(S)

O.O. Askren, of Santa Fe, for appellant Dunlap. Roy Prentice, of Tucumcari, for appellant Stewart. R.A. Prentice, of Tucumcari, for appellant Wells. Fred J. Voorhees, of Raton, for appellant Shedoudy. H.A. Kiker, of Raton, for appellant Cunico. Fitzhugh Fitzhugh, of Clovis, for appellants Bledsoe and Singer. J.W. Armstrong, Atty. Gen., and J.P. Bujac, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

JUDGES

PER CURIAM.

ACTS

No Acts

See more information ... Less ...
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

PER CURIAM.

Each of the defendants in the above-entitled causes was convicted under sections 1 and 2, c. 118, Laws of 1923, which, as we have just held in State v. Armstrong, No. 2947, 242 P. 440, not as yet [officially] reported, are violative of section 18, art. 4, of the Constitution of this state. The judgment in each of said causes must therefore be reversed and remanded, with direction to discharge the accused.

© 2026 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

x

Alert

Please log in or sign up for a free trial to access this feature.
Sign Up Login
x