N.M. R. Crim. P. Magist. Ct. 6-202.1
Committee commentary. - Rule 11-803(4) NMRA excepts statements made for and reasonably pertinent to medical diagnosis or treatment from the rule against hearsay, regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness. This exception includes statements made to a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) for medical diagnosis or treatment. The committee did not include statements made to a SANE or other medical professional in the exceptions established by this rule because those statements are already addressed by Rule 11-803(4) NMRA.
Additionally, Rule 11-803(2) NMRA excepts statements considered excited utterances from the rule against hearsay, regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness. The committee did not include those statements in the exceptions established by this rule because those statements are already addressed by Rule 11-803(2) NMRA. The exception in Paragraph B of this rule allows for authentication of the 911 recording or CAD transcript without calling a dispatcher or other police employee to testify to lay that foundation.
[Adopted by Supreme Court Order No. 22-8300-023, effective for all cases pending or filed on or after December 31, 2022.]
ANNOTATIONS The 1995 amendment, effective January 1, 1995, added "preliminary hearings" in the rule heading, inserted "human specimen or a" near the beginning in Paragraph A, and rewrote Paragraph A(1) by adding the subparagraph designations and adding Subparagraphs (b) and (d).
For the federal Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act of 1988, referred to in Subparagraph A(1)(d), see 42 U.S.C. § 463a . Right of confrontation. - The right of confrontation guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article II, Section 14 of the New Mexico Constitution is a trial right that does not apply to probable cause determinations in preliminary examinations. State v. Lopez, 2013-NMSC-047, overruling Mascarenas v. State, 1969-NMSC-116, 80 N.M. 537, 458 P.2d 789. Right of confrontation did not apply at preliminary examination. - Where police officers found a bag containing a green leafy substance and a bag that contained a white powdery substance in defendant's vehicle during a search incident to defendant's arrest for driving with a suspended license; at defendant's preliminary examination, the magistrate court admitted a forensic laboratory report into evidence without an opportunity for the defense to personally cross-examine the laboratory analyst who prepared the report; and the report concluded that the white powdery substance was cocaine and the green leafy substance was marijuana, the magistrate court did not violate defendant's confrontation rights under the United States Constitution and the New Mexico Constitution because the constitutional right of confrontation does not apply to probable cause determinations in preliminary examinations. State v. Lopez, 2013-NMSC-047, overruling Mascarenas v. State, 1969-NMSC-116, 80 N.M. 537, 458 P.2d 789.