Supreme Court of New Mexico
Decision Information
Jameson v. First Sav. Bank & Trust Co. - cited by 9 documents
Kent v. Favor - cited by 40 documents
State v. Probert - cited by 78 documents
Decision Content
STATE V. RILEY, 1936-NMSC-013, 40 N.M. 132, 55 P.2d 743 (S. Ct. 1936)
STATE
vs.
RILEY
No. 4166
SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO
1936-NMSC-013, 40 N.M. 132, 55 P.2d 743
March 09, 1936
Appeal from District Court, Torrance County; Numa C. Frenger, Judge.
John F. Riley was convicted of horse stealing, and he appeals.
COUNSEL
R. M. Krannawitter, of Vaughn, and Charles F. Fishback, of Fort Sumner, for appellant.
Frank H. Patton, Atty. Gen., and Edward P. Chase, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
JUDGES
Bickley, Justice. Sadler, C. J., and Hudspeth, Brice, and Zinn, JJ., concur.
OPINION
{*132} {1} Defendant was convicted of horse stealing. The evidence substantiates the verdict. Besides assailing the sufficiency of the evidence, appellant complains of the court's denial of his motion for continuance on account of absence of a witness. No facts were pleaded in the motion showing reasonable ground for belief that the attendance of the witness would be procured at the next court term. The motion contained no allegation that the defendant knew of no other witness by whom the facts could be fully proved. These defects defeat the motion. See Kent v. Favor, 3 N.M. 347, 5 P. 470; State v. Probert, 19 N.M. 13, 140 P. 1108.
{*133} {2} There was no error in permitting the defendant, a witness in his own behalf, to be asked on cross-examination whether he had been convicted of a felony and served a term in the penitentiary. See section 45-606, Comp.St.1929, which in part is as follows: "A witness may be questioned as to whether he has been convicted of any felony or misdemeanor."
{3} Finding no error in the record, the judgment is affirmed and it is so ordered.