NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the legislature.  The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for other purposes.

The most recent FIR version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative Website. The Adobe PDF version includes all attachments, whereas the HTML version does 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:	Garcia		DATE TYPED:	01/28/03		HB	175
SHORT TITLE:		Prohibit Paid Surety Arrest				SB
					ANALYST:		Fox-Young

APPROPRIATION

Appropriation Contained		Estimated Additional Impact		Recurring or Non-Rec	Fund Affected
FY03	FY04	FY03	FY04
			NFI

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

Responses Received From

Attorney General (AG)

No Response

Administrative Office of the District Attorneys (AODA)

Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)

SUMMARY

Synopsis of Bill

House Bill 175 makes it a crime for a paid surety to arrest an accused that has not been charged with a felony. The bill amends NMSA 1978, Section 31-3-4(B) to provide that an accused must be charged with a felony before a paid surety may arrest the accused and deliver him or her to the sheriff in order to discharge the surety’s bond obligation. Whoever commits illegal arrest by a paid surety is guilty of a fourth degree felony.

A paid surety is defined as “(1) a person that has taken money, property or other consideration by or on behalf of a person charged with a crime in order to enter into a bail bond obligation benefiting that person; or (2) an agent of a paid surety described in Paragraph (1)”

JCF/prr