TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

State v. Raulie

State v. Raulie.

State v. Raulie, 59 P.2d 359 (N.M. 1936)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New Mexico Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 23, 1936
Docket
No. 4177.
Judges
Zinn, Sadler, Hudspeth, Bickley, Brice
Citations
59 P.2d 35940 N.M. 318

Opinion of the Court — Zinn

ZINN, Justice.

An information was filed in the district court of Curry county charging the appellant with the crime of mayhem. Comp.St. 1929, § 35-401. Upon trial and verdict of guilty, appellant was sentenced to a term in the penitentiary of not less than one nor more than two years. From the verdict and sentence the case is here on appeal.

We have carefully reviewed the evidence. It is needless to set forth the same here at length. All that the prosecution proved was a fist fight and brawl. We can find no evidence in the record wherein a conviction of the appellant upon the charge of mayhem can be sustained. True the appellant punched the prosecuting witness in the mouth, which punch cut his lip and required some stitches put in; yet no permanent injury to the lip has been shown. No evidence is in the record showing that the prosecuting witness has been maimed or disfigured. Without such showing the offense is not complete. 8 R.C.L. 305.

“Where the evidence in a criminal case not only fails to support the verdict, but shows conclusively that the defendant did not commit the crime charged, this court, of its own motion, will take notice of the fact, and reverse the judgment, notwithstanding the defendant is precluded from insisting on the error by reason of failure to take and preserve proper exceptions in the court below.” State v. Garcia, 19 N.M. 414 , 143 P. 1012 .

We would be derelict in our duty to permit a man to be sent to the penitentiary charged with mayhem, when all the evidence merely proves an assault and battery.

For the reasons given, the case will be reversed,. with directions to discharge the appellant.

It is so ordered.

SADLER, C. J., and HUDSPETH, BICKLEY, and BRICE, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1972: 11978: 11979: 11981: 12019: 219722026peak 2019 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. Earl Cook462 F.2d 301 (D.C. Cir. 1972)
  2. People v. Turner250 Cal. Rptr. 3d 296 (2019)
  3. Adams v. State598 P.2d 503 (Alaska 1979)
  4. Goodman v. Superior Court84 Cal. App. 3d 621 (1978)
  5. People v. TurnerNo. C086476 (Cal. Ct. App. July 23, 2019)
  6. People v. Newble120 Cal. App. 3d 444 (1981)

Most recent

  1. People v. TurnerNo. C086476 (Cal. Ct. App. July 23, 2019)
  2. People v. Turner250 Cal. Rptr. 3d 296 (2019)
  3. People v. Newble120 Cal. App. 3d 444 (1981)
  4. Adams v. State598 P.2d 503 (Alaska 1979)
  5. Goodman v. Superior Court84 Cal. App. 3d 621 (1978)
  6. United States v. Earl Cook462 F.2d 301 (D.C. Cir. 1972)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
State v. Garcia, 143 P. 1012 (N.M. 1914) 124

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list