State v. Garcia’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 90 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 92 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “When a litigant asserts protection under a New Mexico Constitutional provision that has a parallel or analogous provision in the United States Constitution, the requirements for preserving the claim for appellate review depend on current New Mexico precedent construing that state constitutional provision. If established precedent construes the provision to provide more protection than its federal counterpart, the claim may be preserved by (1) asserting the constitutional principle that provides the protection sought under the New Mexico Constitution, and (2) showing the factual basis needed for the trial court to rule on the issue. This is no more than is required of litigants asserting a right under the federal constitution, a federal statute, a state statute, or common law. That is, Rule 12-216 requires that litigants “fairly invoke” a ruling by the trial court in order to raise that question on appeal. Assertion of the legal principle and development of the facts are generally the only requirement to assert a claim on appeal. However, when a party asserts a state constitutional right that has not been interpreted differently than its federal analog, a party also must assert in the trial court that the state constitutional provision at issue should be interpreted more expansively than the federal counterpart and provide reasons for interpreting the state provision differently from the federal provision. This will enable the trial court to tailor proceedings and to effectuat”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Leyva

2. “test articulated in Mendenhall provides the standard for determining whether a person is seized for purposes of Article II, Section 10 of the New Mexico Constitution. We decide this appeal on state constitutional grounds, applying the Mendenhall”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Simpson

3. “a plethora of precedent already interprets Article II, Section 10 more expansively than the Fourth Amendment.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. ARMENDARIZ-NUNEZ