2023 New Mexico Statutes › Chapter 30 - Criminal Offenses › Article 3 - Assault and Battery › Section 30-3-6 - Reasonable detention; assault, battery, public affray or criminal damage to property.

A. As used in this section:
(1) "licensed premises" means all public and private rooms, facilities and areas in which alcoholic beverages are sold or served in the customary operating procedures of establishments licensed to sell or serve alcoholic liquors;
(2) "proprietor" means the owner of the licensed premises or his manager or his designated representative; and
(3) "operator" means the owner or the manager of any establishment or premises open to the public.
B. Any law enforcement officer may arrest without warrant any persons he has probable cause for believing have committed the crime of assault or battery as defined in Sections 30-3-1 through 30-3-5 NMSA 1978 or public affray or criminal damage to property. Any proprietor or operator who causes such an arrest shall not be criminally or civilly liable if he has actual knowledge, communicated truthfully and in good faith to the law enforcement officer, that the persons so arrested have committed the crime of assault or battery as defined in Sections 30-3-1 through 30-3-5 NMSA 1978 or public affray or criminal damage to property.
History:
Laws 1981, ch. 255, § 1; 1983, ch. 268, § 1.
ANNOTATIONS
The 1983 amendment
deleted "on licensed premises" following "detention" in the catchline, added "or criminal damage to property" at the end of the catchline, inserted Paragraph (3) of Subsection A, substituted "Sections" for "Section" in the first sentence of Subsection B, added "or criminal damage to property" at the end of the first and second sentences of Subsection B and inserted "or operator" and "communicated truthfully and in good faith to the law enforcement officer" in the second sentence of Subsection B.
Warrantless arrest was not unlawful.
— Where defendant, charged with petty misdemeanor battery in magistrate court, filed a motion to dismiss or in the alternative to suppress evidence, arguing that his arrest violated the misdemeanor arrest rule and that the evidence was tainted by the unlawful arrest, and where the magistrate court dismissed the criminal complaint and the state appealed to the district court, and where the district court determined that defendant's arrest was illegal and remanded the case to magistrate court for imposition of the court's dismissal order, the district court erred in determining that defendant's arrest was illegal, because a plain reading of this section permits a law enforcement officer to arrest people for certain enumerated crimes, including battery, without a warrant when the officer has probable cause to believe that a crime has occurred, and in this case, the state presented facts sufficient to establish probable cause that defendant committed a battery against the victim.
State v. Veith
, 2022-NMCA-039, cert. denied.
Warrantless arrest made under the authority of this section was not unconstitutional.
— Where defendant, charged with petty misdemeanor battery in magistrate court, filed a motion to dismiss or in the alternative to suppress evidence, arguing that his arrest violated the misdemeanor arrest rule and that the evidence was tainted by the unlawful arrest, and where the magistrate court dismissed the criminal complaint, and where the district court, on the state's appeal, determined that defendant's arrest was illegal and remanded the case to magistrate court for imposition of the court's dismissal order, defendant's warrantless arrest was valid under the New Mexico constitution, because an on-the-scene arrest supported by probable cause will usually supply the requisite exigency, and in this case, the responding officer was dispatched to the scene based on a call that defendant was attacking the victim, arrived at the scene, interviewed witnesses, and determined based on his investigation that he had probable cause to arrest defendant for battery. The officer did not have information to act on before he arrived at the scene and investigated, and he did not have time to secure a warrant before responding; the officer developed probable cause to arrest based on his review of the evidence at the scene.
State v. Veith
, 2022-NMCA-039, cert. denied.