Court Opinion

ID: 9539700
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 16:08:41.103167+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:59:14.799000
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing. NOBLE, Justice. The question as to whether the defendant may be retried under the first count of the information charging illegal possession of marijuana was not argued on the principal appeal. The State on rehearing urges that in holding that the defendant must be discharged by reason of our determination that the conviction under the second count is not supported by substantial evidence, we overlooked the instruction of the trial court directing the jury to disregard count one if they should convict him under the second count. The State urges that the jury was prohibited by the instructions from consideration of count one and that no verdict having been rendered on count one, the defendant may be retried on that count.  We are met, at the very outset, with an insurmountable obstacle to a retrial under count one of the information. There can be no question but that the court had jurisdiction, nor that issue was joined upon that count. The defendant was put in jeopardy in the original proceeding and cannot be again put in jeopardy in the absence of some compelling reason which requires a declaration of a mistrial. In Ex parte Williams, 58 N.M. 37, 265 P.2d 359, 362, where the district attorney asked and obtained dismissal of an information at the conclusion of the State’s case, because he thought the information failed to properly charge the offense, and where it was held on appeal that the information was sufficient, it was said: “Assuming the court has jurisdiction, and prior proceedings are valid, jeopardy attaches when issue is joined upon an indictment or information, and the jury is * * * is sworn to try the cause.”  The effect of the instruction by the trial court was to dismiss the first count of the information and operated as a judgment of acquittal. Ex parte Williams, supra. Rehearing will be denied and the mandate will issue in accordance with the direction heretofore entered. COMPTON, C. J., and CHAVEZ, J., concur. CARMODY and MOISE, JJ., not participating.