Opinion ID: 2614688
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Weekend Voting.

Text: Three votes were invalidated by the trial court because the voters cast their absentee ballots in person at the County Clerk's office during the weekend when the office was normally closed. The lower court found that Section 1-6-5(E), which states that [a]bsentee ballots may be cast in person during the regular hours and days of business at the county clerk's office from 8:00 a.m. on the fortieth day preceding the election up until 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday immediately prior to the date of the election is a mandatory provision (emphasis added). We disagree. We have previously distinguished between mandatory and directory election provisions. Telles v. Carter, 57 N.M. 704, 262 P.2d 985 (1953); Valdez v. Herrera, 48 N.M. 45, 145 P.2d 864 (1944). In Valdez, the votes from four precincts were ruled by the trial court to be void because the poll books were not delivered within twenty-four hours of the closing of the polls as required by the statute. This Court stated there that the voter shall not be deprived of his rights as an elector either by fraud or the mistake of the election officers if it is possible to prevent it. Id. at 55, 145 P.2d at 870. Earlier in Wright v. Closson, Mayor, et. al., 29 N.M. 546, 553, 224 P. 483, 485 (1924), this Court held that the election will not be disturbed by reason of technical irregularities in the manner of conducting it or of making the returns thereof, especially in the absence of pleading and proof that the result was thereby changed or at least made uncertain. See also Gallegos v. Miera, 28 N.M. 565, 215 P. 968 (1923). This Court has held that [m]ere irregularities in the conduct of an election will not render an election void in the absence of a statute so providing,    Orchard v. Board of Com'rs of Sierra County, 42 N.M. 172, 187, 76 P.2d 41, 51 (1938); see Gallegos v. Miera, supra . This Court in Orchard applied the principle to irregularities in canvassing the election returns. Other cases have found statutory provisions to be directory and not sufficient to cancel a voter's ballot. Valdez, supra (the ballots were not delivered to the County Clerk within the statutory period); Bryan, supra (the applications were not personally signed by the voter but by some other person); Wright, supra (an erroneous election proclamation); Gallegos, supra (a violation of the statutory provisions for wrapping and tying ballots, placing them in the box and sealing the box); and State ex rel. Walker v. Bridges, 27 N.M. 169, 199 P. 370 (1921) (procedures for the registration of voters). No statutory provision specifies that an absentee ballot is void if it is voted by the voter in the County Clerk's office on a weekend rather than during regular office hours. No fraud was alleged or proved. We therefore hold that the taking of these ballots on the weekend by the County Clerk was a technical irregularity which did not threaten the purity of the electoral process. We hold that the trial court erred in invalidating these votes.