Bobby Ray Baldock
How Judge Baldock rules, drawn from 12 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Baldock no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Baldock decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Baldock denied suppression after finding that a checkpoint stop was systematic, the driver lacked a demonstrated privacy interest in the rental car, and the ensuing consent was voluntary.
“This court finds that the stop of the defendant was part of a lawful roadblock designed to check driver’s licenses and car registrations of all oncoming traffic, insofar as safely possible.”
He treated an extraordinary and deliberately harmful use of an automobile trunk as unforeseeable when defining the manufacturer's design duty.
“The court holds that the plaintiffs use of the trunk compartment as a means to attempt suicide was an unforeseeable use as a matter of law.”
Procedural preferences
Baldock required suppression motions to connect specific facts to the governing law before granting an evidentiary hearing.
“There must be some specific factual basis underlying the defendant’s constitutional theory of suppression.”
In parallel federal and state water-rights litigation, he remanded the state actions and dismissed the federal action without prejudice to allow a comprehensive state adjudication to proceed.
“It serves no good purpose for this unfocused federal trespass action to linger while the general adjudication proceeds.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendant’s motion will be granted.”
“WHEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that defendant Delnita L. Peterson’s Motion to Suppress Statements and Motion to Suppress be, and the same hereby are, denied.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the counterclaim of United Nuclear Corporation is dismissed without prejudice.”
Baldock concluded that favorable provisions of the repealed Youth Corrections Act remained available when sentencing a defendant whose offense predated repeal, because eliminating those options would be retrospective and disadvantageous.
“The court, having considered any accompanying memoranda submitted by the parties, the relevant law, and otherwise being advised fully in the premises, finds that the motions are not well taken and should be denied.”
“IT IS ORDERED that defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is granted.”
“NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment against Coleman Drilling Co. submitted by the defendants and third-party plaintiffs Mobil Oil Corp. and Mobil Producing Texas and New Mexico, Inc. is granted in part and denied in part.”
“IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Physical Evidence and Motion to Suppress Statements be, and the same hereby are, denied.”
“IT IS ORDERED that defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is granted and that plaintiff shall take nothing by its complaint.”
“The court, having considered the memoranda submitted by the parties, the relevant law, and otherwise being advised fully in the premises, finds that the motion is well taken in part and should be granted in part.”
“the United States’ Motion to Dismiss (pleading no. 8) is denied.”
“the United States’ Motion to Dismiss (pleading no. 15) is denied.”
“the plaintiffs’ motions for remand (pleading nos. 3 & 17, respectively) are granted in part in that these two cases were removed improvidently and without jurisdiction and now are remanded to the New Mexico State District Court for the Thirteenth Judicial District, Cibola County.”
“certain defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (pleading no. 1378) is granted and this case is dismissed against all defendants, without prejudice.”
“Bail will be denied pending appeal.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
No assigned-case timeline was available for this closed district tenure. The located writings span criminal suppression and bail, civil rights, federal torts, products liability, antitrust, environmental review, oil-field indemnity, and water rights, but they do not establish the distribution of Baldock's full district caseload.
A historical record
Judge Baldock no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.