Yesterday, we discussed CAAF’s grant of a Walters/Seider issue in United States v. Ross. We have now received a copy of NMCCA’s opinion in the case, which we’ve posted here. United States v. Ross, No. NMCCA 200800313 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. Dec. 4, 2008) (per curiam).

This case effectively refutes some sniping in the comments section suggesting that the CCAs haven’t been sufficiently attentive to Walters/Seider issues. This case was originally submitted on the merits to NMCCA, which specified the Walters/Seider issue.

3 Responses to “NMCCA’s Ross opinion”

  1. Anonymous says:

    I would surmise that the only reason the Walters issue was on NMCCA's radar screen was because they had just had oral argument on it in Trew.

    So I would hesitate before giving them too much credit.

  2. John O'Connor says:

    Well, it wasn't on appellate defense counsel's radar screen, apparently.

  3. Phil Cave says:

    Not the first time NMCCA has had to specify an issue, and then grant relief, and then CAAF grant complete relief.