N.M. R. Crim. P. Magist. Ct. 6-506.1
N.M. R. Crim. P. Magist. Ct. 6-506.1
Committee commentary. - In 2004, Rule 6-506 NMRA was split into two rules. This rule is former Paragraphs A through D of Rule 6-506 NMRA.
The court's acceptance of a no contest or guilty plea does not raise a double jeopardy bar to subsequent prosecution if the charges to which the defendant has pled subsequently are dismissed prior to sentencing. See State v. Angel, 2002-NMSC-025, ¶ 16, 132 N.M. 501, 51 P.3d 1155 (holding that double jeopardy did not bar subsequent prosecution in district court where the magistrate court accepted the defendant's no contest plea to misdemeanor offenses but dismissed the charges prior to sentencing); see also State v. Lizzol, 2007-NMSC-024, ¶ 7, 141 N.M. 705, 160 P.3d 886 (explaining that whether a dismissal constitutes an acquittal, and therefore bars reprosecution on double jeopardy grounds, depends on "whether the trial court's ruling, however labeled, correctly or incorrectly resolved some or all of the factual elements of the crime").
Paragraph E was added in 2017 to address the inefficiency and confusion that may arise when the same charges are pending in both magistrate court and district court, or when charges that were filed together as a single case in magistrate court are split into two cases, one in magistrate court and one in district court. For example, an indictment may be filed in district court that includes the felony charges pending in magistrate court but not the associated misdemeanor charges. Upon notice from the prosecutor, the magistrate court should dismiss its entire case without prejudice. The prosecutor retains discretion to refile charges in either district or magistrate court.
[As amended by Supreme Court Order No. 13-8300-030, effective for all cases pending or filed on or after December 31, 2013; as amended by Supreme Court Order No. 17-8300-024, effective for all cases pending or filed on or after December 31, 2017.]
ANNOTATIONS The 2017 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 17-8300-024, effective December 31, 2017, revised the provisions for voluntary dismissals, provided for the dismissal of cases in magistrate court when the same charges are pending in both magistrate and district court, made certain technical revisions to the rule, and revised the committee commentary; in Paragraph A, deleted Subparagraph A(1), redesignated former Subparagraph A(2) as Subparagraph A(1), and deleted "if the charges are within magistrate court trial jurisdiction", deleted former Subparagraph A(3) and added a new Subparagraph A(2); in Paragraph B, after "shall", deleted "not", after "exonerate a bond", deleted "prior to the expiration of the time for automatic exoneration pursuant to Subparagraphs (A)(1) or (A)(2) of" and added "only as provided in", and after "Rule 6-406 NMRA", deleted "of these rules"; in Paragraph C, in the introductory clause, after "without prejudice", deleted "or in the case of a felony complaint, discharged", in Subparagraph C(2), after "dismissed", deleted "or discharged", in Subparagraph C(3), after "dismissed", deleted "or discharged", and in Subparagraph C(4), after "dismissed", deleted "or discharged"; in Paragraph D, in the heading, added "cases within magistrate court trial jurisdiction, and after "without prejudice", deleted "or discharged"; and added Paragraph E. The 2013 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 13-8300-030, effective December 31, 2013, required that a notice of dismissal be filed after the acceptance of a plea and before sentencing; expanded the rule to include the discharge of felony complaints; provided that the time between dismissal and refiling a complaint is not counted as part of the time for trial under Rule 6-506 NMRA; added Subparagraph (1) of Paragraph A; in Paragraph C, deleted the former title "Refiled complaints; cases within magistrate court trial jurisdiction" and added the current title and after "without prejudice", added "or in the case of a felony complaint, discharged"; in Subparagraphs (2), (3), and (4), after "dismissed", added "or discharged"; and in Paragraph D, in the first sentence, after "without prejudice", added "or discharged" and added the second sentence. The 2004 amendment. - Paragraphs A and B of this rule are the same as Paragraphs A through B of Rule 6-506 prior to the August 1, 2004 amendment of that rule. Paragraph C of this rule relating to refiled complaints replaces former Paragraph C of Rule 6-506 NMRA. Paragraph D of this rule replaces former Paragraph D of Rule 6-506 NMRA. Recompilations. - Pursuant to Supreme Court Order No. 17-8300-024, former 6-506A NMRA was recompiled and amended as 6-506.1 NMRA, effective December 31, 2017.
For form on notice of dismissal of criminal complaint, see Criminal Form 9-415 NMRA. Review of suppression order. - The state may obtain judicial review of a suppression order of a magistrate court by filing a nolle prosequi to dismiss some or all of the charges in the magistrate court after the suppression order is entered, and refiling in the district court for a trial de novo. State v. Heinsen, 2005-NMSC-035, 138 N.M. 441, 121 P.3d 1040. Scope of district court review of pretrial motion filed in magistrate court upon refiling in district court. - Where defendant was charged with aggravated driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or drugs (DWI), and where the magistrate court granted defendant's motion to exclude the arresting officer from testifying at trial, based on defendant's inability to secure a pretrial witness interview with the officer, and where the state sought review of the magistrate court's order of suppression by refiling the case in district court, the district court erred in deciding defendant's motion based upon the facts as they existed in the district court, not as they were before the magistrate court. The district court should have conducted an independent review of the pretrial motion to exclude filed in magistrate court. State v. Verret, 2019-NMCA-010.