N.M. R. Evid. 11-602
A witness may testify to a matter only if evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may consist of the witness's own testimony. This rule does not apply to testimony by an expert witness under Rule 11-703 NMRA.
N.M. R. Evid. 11-602
Committee commentary. - The language of Rule 11-602 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 2012 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 12-8300-015, effective for all cases pending or filed on or after June 16, 2012, rewrpte the title of the rule and the rule to make stylistic changes. The 1993 amendment, effective December 1, 1993, substituted "the witness" for "he" in the first sentence, and substituted "the witness's own testimony" for "the testimony of the witness himself" in the second sentence. Compiler's notes. - This rule is similar to Rule 602 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.
For admissibility of opinion testimony by lay witnesses, see Rule 11-701 NMRA. Dismissal of charges not appropriate remedy. - Fact that undercover officer failed to comply with the oath and appointment requirements of this section did not warrant dismissal of charges against defendant, as officer was still qualified to testify. State v. Vallejos, 1998-NMCA-151, 126 N.M. 161, 967 P.2d 836. Knowledge of identity. - Opinion of witness as to identity need not be based upon recognition of face and features, but may be based upon voice, size, gait and movements of the person whose identity is in question. State v. Fore, 1933-NMSC-019, 37 N.M. 143, 19 P.2d 749; State v. Quintana, 1961-NMSC-108, 69 N.M. 51, 364 P.2d 120. Witness' testimony limited to matters about which he had personal knowledge. - In seller's action against buyer for purchase price in contract of sale and buyer's counterclaim for breach of contract, court did not abuse its discretion in permitting seller's sales manager to testify, where sales manager's only connection with case was a telephone conversation with buyer and where court carefully restricted sales manager's testimony to matters relating to conduct of seller's business about which he had personal knowledge. Kirk Co. v. Ashcraft, 1984-NMSC-065, 101 N.M. 462, 684 P.2d 1127. Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. - Competency of nonexpert witness to testify, in criminal case, based upon personal observation, as to whether person was under the influence of drugs, 21 A.L.R.4th 905. 97 C.J.S. Witnesses § 54.