N.M. R. Crim. P. Magist. Ct. 6-605
Committee commentary. - Paragraph C was amended in 2015 to clarify the way that peremptory challenges should be counted.
Paragraph G of this rule was added to clarify the procedure for using and retaining juror qualification and questionnaire forms. In cases where an issue may be raised on appeal concerning jury selection or a particular juror, the appellant may consider filing a motion in the district court within ninety (90) days of the jury verdict to request an order requiring the retention of the juror qualification and questionnaire forms for inclusion in the record proper filed in the appellate court. Paragraph G of this rule supersedes administrative regulations concerning the retention of juror qualification and questionnaire forms.
[Adopted by Supreme Court Order No. 13-8300-042, effective for all cases pending or filed on or after December 31, 2013; as amended by Supreme Court Order No. 15-8300-006, effective for all cases pending or filed on or after December 31, 2015; as amended by Supreme Court Order No. 18-8300-008, effective December 31, 2018.]
ANNOTATIONS The 2018 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 18-8300-008, effective December 31, 2018, provided additional privacy protections and destruction requirements for information contained in juror questionnaire forms, provided an exception to the confidentiality rules, made certain nonsubstantive changes, and revised the committee commentary; in Paragraph G, after the semicolon, added "certification of compliance with privacy requirements", and after "Supreme Court", added "which shall be subject to the following protections:", added subparagraph designations "(1)" and "(2)", in Subparagraph G(1), after "questionnaire forms,", added "including any electronic copies", after "possession of the court", deleted "as well as in the possession of others, including", and after "individual or entity", added "shall be kept confidential unless ordered unsealed under the provisions in Rule 6-114 NMRA", in Subparagraph G(2), added "All completed juror qualification and questionnaire forms, including any electronic copies, in the possession of the court, attorneys, parties, and any other individual or entity", and after "shall be destroyed", added "according to the following deadlines:", added subparagraph designation "(a)", in Subparagraph G(2)(a), added "All copies in the possession of the court shall be destroyed", and after "retention", deleted "of the form" and added "for a longer period of time; and", and added Subparagraphs G(2)(b) and G(3); and in Paragraph H, added the last sentence of the paragraph relating to confidentiality and destruction protections. The 2015 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 15-8300-006, effective December 31, 2015, clarified the number of peremptory challenges to which the parties are entitled, made stylistic changes, and revised the committee commentary; in Paragraph A, after "six", added "(6)", after "required, the", deleted "magistrate" and added "court"; in Paragraph B, after each occurrence of "magistrate", added "judge"; in Paragraph C, in the first sentence, after "If the", added "highest", after "challenge", added "regardless of the number of charges", in the second sentence, after "If the", added "highest", after "challenges", added "regardless of the number of charges", and in the third sentence, after "magistrate", added "judge"; in Subparagraph D(1), in the first sentence, after "The", deleted "magistrate" and added "court", and in the second sentence, after "magistrate", added "judge"; and in Subparagraphs D(2) and (4), after "magistrate", added "judge". The 2013 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 13-8300-042, effective December 31, 2013, required the names of prospective jurors to be entered into the court's juror management system; required prospective jurors to complete an approved juror qualification and questionnaire form and supplemental questionnaires, if ordered by the court; provided for the destruction of juror qualification and questionnaire forms; in Paragraph D, Subparagraph (1), deleted the former first sentence, which required the magistrate to place the names of prospective jurors on a slip of paper and place the slips of paper into a box, added the current first sentence, and after "shall be prepared", deleted "by" and added "at the direction of", and after "direction of the magistrate", deleted "or at his direction"; in Subparagraph (2), deleted the former last sentence, which provided for the drawing of additional jurors' names to replace those excused; in Subparagraph (4), in the first sentence, after "One", added "or more" and after "selected at the", added "direction of the" and after "magistrate", deleted "at his discretion, so elects"; in Paragraph E, after "completed by", deleted "drawing additional slips" and added "reading the names of those present"; and added Paragraphs G and H. The 1989 amendment, effective for cases filed in the magistrate courts on or after September 1, 1989, in Subparagraph (2) of Paragraph D, deleted the former "(a)" designation from the beginning and deleted former (b), which read "or (b) the magistrate may draw six slips with the juror's names thereon from the box and these six jurors may be questioned as a group and individually" from the end of the first sentence. When a magistrate court extends the time for trial beyond the six-month period, the court is not required to create a record of what were the exceptional circumstances that led to the decision to extend the time for trial. State v. Sharp, 2012-NMCA-042, 276 P.3d 969, cert. denied, 2012-NMCERT-003. Law reviews. - For note, "Criminal Law - Discriminatory Use of Peremptory Challenges in Jury Selection: State of New Mexico v. Sandoval," see 19 N.M.L. Rev. 563 (1989). Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. - 21 Am. Jur. 2d Criminal Law §§ 679 to 685. Right of consent to trial of criminal case before less than 12 jurors; and effect of consent upon jurisdiction of court to proceed with less than 12, 70 A.L.R. 279, 105 A.L.R. 1114. Indoctrination by court of persons summoned for jury service, 89 A.L.R.2d 197. Validity of jury selection as affected by accused's absence from conducting of procedures for selection and impaneling of final jury panel for specific case, 33 A.L.R.4th 429. 50 C.J.S. Juries § 155 et seq.