State v. Beachum, 762
| Citation | 83 N.M. 526, 494 P.2d 188, 1972 NMCA 23 |
| Case Date | February 04, 1972 |
| Court | Court of Appeals of New Mexico |
Page 188
v.
Robert Lee BEACHUM, Defendant-Appellant.
[83 NM 526] Turner W. Branch, Branch & Dickson, Albuquerque, for appellant.
David L. Norvell, Atty. Gen., Ronald Van Amberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., Santa Fe, for appellee.
COWAN, Judge.
Defendant appeals from an order denying three motions, without a hearing, filed pursuant to Rule 93 (§ 21--1--1(93), N.M.S.A.1953 (Repl.Vol. 4)). His conviction for armed robbery was affirmed by this court in State v. Beachum, 82 N.M. 204, 477 P.2d 1019 (Ct.App.1970), rehearing denied November 25, 1970; second rehearing denied December 23, 1970.
The three motions are directed at the trial in the district court. We affirm.
The trial court, 'having examined the files and records in this case', denied the three motions on the ground that the 'allegations' contained in the motions had been ruled upon adversely to defendant by the Court of Appeals of New Mexico. The court made no findings of fact or conclusions of law.
Defendant now urges that the allegations of his three motions required the court to hold a hearing on the merits of the claim, which if proved would have entitled him to relief. This argument is without merit.
The matters specified in the motions, which defendant claims were violative of his constitutional right to a fair trial and due process of law, are ones which either were, or should have been, submitted to this court for its consideration
Page 189
[83 NM 527] on direct appeal. Proceedings under Rule 93 are not intended as a substitute for an appeal as a means for correcting errors which may have occurred during the course of the trial. State v. Sedillo, 79 N.M. 254, 442 P.2d 212 (Ct.App.1968). Neither is a post-conviction proceeding a method by which one can obtain consideration of questions which might have been raised on appeal. State v. Sanchez, 80 N.M. 688, 459 P.2d 850 (Ct.App.1969). It is noted that defendant not only appealed his conviction but presented two motions for rehearing after decision by this court.Whether the 'allegations contained in the Motions to Set Aside and Vacate Judgment and Sentence have been ruled upon adversely to defendant by the Court of Appeals of New Mexico', as stated in the trial court's order denying the motions, is not determinative of a decision here. The claimed errors were ones which are properly and normally raised and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Pena, 18117
...a search of the rest of the car and the paper sack. We should sustain the trial court if the result is correct. See State v. Beachum, 83 N.M. 526, 494 P.2d 188 (Ct.App.1972). Where the defendant has taken an active role in the search itself, that fact would strengthen a finding of voluntary......
-
State v. Trujillo
...abuse of discretion standard. See State v. Salgado, 1999 NMSC 8, PP5-11, 126 N.M. 691, 974 P.2d 661; see also State v. Beachum, 83 N.M. 526, 527, 494 P.2d 188, 189 (Ct. App. 1972) HN9("A decision of the trial court will be upheld if it is right for any 3. The dissent notes that the statemen......
-
Morris v. Brandenburg, Docket No. 33,630
...a state constitutional issue that was not considered or ruled upon in the district court); State v. Beachum, 1972-NMCA-023, ¶ 8, 83 N.M. 526, 494 P.2d 188 ("A decision of the trial court will be upheld if it is right for any reason."). No one argues that the district court erred by failing ......
-
Morris v. Brandenburg, 33,630
...a state constitutional issue that was not considered or ruled upon in the district court); State v. Beachum, 1972-NMCA-023, ¶ 8, 83 N.M. 526, 494 P.2d 188 ("A decision of the trial court will be upheld if it is right for any reason."). No one argues that the district court erred by failing ......