Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance

committees of the NM Legislature. The LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports

if they are used for other purposes.

Current FIRs (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) are a vailable on the NM Legislative Website (legis.state.nm.us).

Adobe PDF versions include all attachments, whereas HTML versions may not. Previously issued FIRs and

attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.

F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T

SPONSOR Neville

ORIGINAL DATE

LAST UPDATED

1/23/2007

2/9/2007 HB

SHORT TITLE Immunity From Civil Action for Use of Force

SB 152/a SPAC

ANALYST Schuss

APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands)

Appropriation

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY07

FY08

NFI

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

Relates to, Conflicts with HB 163, SB 39

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC Files

Responses Received From

Attorney General’s Office (AGO)

Department of Public Safety (DPS)

Public Defender Department (PDD)

Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)

No Response Received

Administrative Office of the DA

SUMMARY

Synopsis of Amendment

The amendment changes Section 1, Subsection A of SB 152 to read:

A person who uses force that is justified pursuant to Section 30-2-7 NMSA 1978, or who

is otherwise found to have acted in self-defense or defense of another whether or not the person

causes property damage, injury or death, is immune from civil action for the use of such force

unless the person knew or reasonably should have known that the person against whom the force

was used was a law enforcement officer acting in the scope of official duties.

Senate Bill 152/a SPAC – Page

2

Synopsis of Original Bill

Senate Bill 152 provides immunity from civil action to persons using force that is deemed

justifiable homicide pursuant to NMSA Section 30-2-7, or who have otherwise acted in self-

defense or defense of another. The bill requires the court to award reasonable costs and attorney

fees as well as compensation for loss of income and other reasonable expenses to a defendant if

that person is found to be immune under the provisions of the bill. The bill exempts the use of

force against police officers acting within the scope of their duties from its immunity provisions

if the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that they were a law

enforcement officer.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

The Administrative Office of the Courts notes that there will be a minimal administrative cost for

statewide update, distribution and documentation of statutory changes. Any additional fiscal

impact on the judiciary would be proportional to challenges to verdicts and awards, based on

claims of self-defense. New laws, amendments to existing laws and new hearings have the

potential to increase caseloads in the courts, thus requiring additional resources to handle the

increase.

The Public Defender Department states that the passage of this bill might actually reduce their

workload infinitesimally.

SIGNIFICANT ISSUES

The Attorney General’s office states that current law already provides immunity from liability

for damages incurred as a consequence of the commission of a crime or flight by the plaintiff, or

from the use of force or justifiable homicide. NMSA Section 31-23-1.

The bill provides immunity from “civil action", which implies a prohibition against bringing or

maintaining a civil lawsuit. However, other state laws clearly confer immunity from civil

liability, which appears to be distinguishable from bringing a cause of action. See for example

NMSA Section 59A-4-21 “No cause of action shall arise nor shall any liability be imposed";

NMSA Section 31-23-1 “No person shall be liable to a plaintiff in any civil action for damages"

etc.

The bill requires a court to award damages to a defendant found to be immune from “civil

action". However, such a requirement might usurp the authority of the courts to determine and

award damages.

PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS

The Administrative Office of the Courts adds that the courts are participating in performance-

based budgeting. As a result of challenges to verdicts and awards, this bill may have an impact

on the measures of the district courts in the following areas:

•

Cases disposed of as a percent of cases filed

•

Percent change in case filings by case type

•

Clearance Rate

Senate Bill 152/a SPAC – Page

3

CONFLICT, RELATIONSHIP

Conflicts/Relates to SB 39, HB 163

TECHNICAL ISSUES

The Public Defender Department states that the bill appears to be similar to the current Immunity

from Civil Damages statute (NMSA 1978, § 31-23-1), which presently provides:

31-23-1.

Civil

action;

crime;

damages;

immunity

No person shall be liable to a plaintiff in any civil action for damages if by a

preponderance of the evidence the damages were incurred as a consequence of:

A. the commission, attempted commission or flight subsequent to the commission of a

crime by the plaintiff; and

B. the use of force or deadly force by the defendant which is justified pursuant to

common law or the law of the state.

NMSA 1978, § 31-23-1

BS/mt