N.M. R. Evid. 11-1101
N.M. R. Evid. 11-1101
Committee commentary. - The language of Rule 11-1101 NMRA was amended in 2012 to be consistent with the restyling of the Federal Rules of Evidence, effective December 1, 2011, to make them more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules. These changes are intended to be stylistic only. There is no intent to change any result in any ruling on admissibility.
[Adopted by Supreme Court Order No. 12-8300-015, effective for all cases pending or filed on or after June 16, 2012.]
ANNOTATIONS The 2013 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 13-8300-003, effective May 5, 2013, provided that the rules do not apply to dispositional hearings in children's court proceedings and certain abuse and neglect proceedings; deleted former Item (f) of Subparagraph (3) of Paragraph D, which excluded dispositional hearings, permanency hearings and judicial review proceedings in abuse and neglect proceedings from the application of the rules; and added Items (f) and (g) of Subparagraph (3) of Paragraph D. The 2012 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 12-8300-015, effective for all cases pending or filed on or after June 16, 2012, modified the title of the rule and rewrote the rule to make stylistic changes. The 1999 amendment, effective November 17, 1999, inserted "district" in the second sentence in Paragraph A and added "dispositional hearings in children's court proceedings; and issuance of ex parte custody orders, custody hearings, permanency hearings and judicial review proceedings in abuse and neglect proceedings" at the end of Paragraph D(2). The 1993 amendment, effective December 1, 1993, rewrote the last sentence of Paragraph A, which read "The word 'judge' in these rules includes magistrates, and masters, and referees appointed by the court"; substituted "court" for "judge" in Paragraph B and Subparagraph D(1); and inserted "extradition or rendition" in Subparagraph D(2). Compiler's notes. - This rule is similar to Rule 1101 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.
For issuance of ex parte custody orders, see Section 32A-4-16 NMSA 1978. For provisions relating to custody hearings, see Section 32A-4-18 NMSA 1978. For permanency hearings, see Section 32A-4-25.1 NMSA 1978. Probation revocation proceedings. - The formal rules of evidence do not apply to probation revocation hearings. State v. Phillips, 2006-NMCA-001, 138 N.M. 730, 126 P.3d 546, cert. granted, 2006-NMCERT-001. The rules of evidence are inapplicable to probation revocation proceedings. - Evidentiary rules requiring proper authentication and laying a sufficient foundation for admission are not applicable in probation revocation proceedings. State v. Green, 2015-NMCA-007, cert. denied, 2014-NMCERT-012. The Rules of Evidence are applicable to preliminary examinations. - Witnesses may be cross-examined and their credibility and character tested. State v. Massengill, 1983-NMCA-001, 99 N.M. 283, 657 P.2d 139. The Rules of Evidence are inapplicable to suppression hearings, since hearings on motions to suppress evidence obtained as the result of an allegedly illegal search and seizure require the determination of questions of fact preliminary to admissibility of evidence. State v. Hensel, 1987-NMCA-059, 106 N.M. 8, 738 P.2d 126, cert. denied, 484 U.S. 958, 108 S. Ct. 358, 98 L. Ed. 2d 383 (1987). Probation revocation proceedings. - The provision making rules of evidence inapplicable to probation revocation hearings does not militate against application of the exclusionary rule in such hearings. State v. Marquart, 1997-NMCA-090, 123 N.M. 809, 945 P.2d 1027. For proper usage of hearsay in proceeding to revoke probation, a court looks to the law not involving these rules. State v. Vigil, 1982-NMCA-058, 97 N.M. 749, 643 P.2d 618. Applicability to children's court. - The Rules of Evidence apply in transfer hearings in Children's court. In re Darcy S., 1997-NMCA-026, 123 N.M. 206, 936 P.2d 888. Applicability to kinship guardianship revocation proceedings. - Kinship guardians possess the same legal rights and responsibilities that a biological parent would have, and because of the rights and interests involved, the rules of evidence apply in kinship guardianship revocation proceedings pursuant to Section 40-10B-12 NMSA 1978. State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Dep't v. Djamila B., 2015-NMSC-003. Application to juvenile probation revocation proceedings. - Adjudicatory phase of juvenile probation revocation proceedings are not exempt from the New Mexico Rules of Evidence. State v. Erickson K., 2002-NMCA-058, 132 N.M. 258, 46 P.3d 1258, cert. quashed, 132 N.M. 732, 55 P.3d 428. Provision that the New Mexico Rules of Evidence do not apply to "dispositional hearings in children's court proceedings" means that those rules do not apply to the dispositional phase of a juvenile's probation revocation hearing. State v. Erickson K., 2002-NMCA-058, 132 N.M. 258, 46 P.3d 1258, cert. quashed, 132 N.M. 732, 55 P.3d 428. Law reviews. - For annual survey of New Mexico law of evidence, 19 N.M.L. Rev. 679 (1990). Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. - Applicability of rules of evidence in juvenile delinquency proceeding, 43 A.L.R.2d 1128. Situations in which federal courts are governed by state law of privilege under Rule 501 of Federal Rules of Evidence, 48 A.L.R. Fed. 259. Federal Rules of Evidence or state evidentiary rules as applicable in diversity cases, 84 A.L.R. Fed. 283. 21 C.J.S. Courts §§ 124 to 134.