New Mexico Statutes
N.M. Stat. § 1-9-4.2 (2026)
Recompiled
✓ laws through the 2025 session (retrieved May 2026)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NM-LEGnmonesource.com
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
History: Laws 2003, ch. 356, § 9; 2005, ch. 270, § 58; 2007, ch. 337, § 11; recompiled as § 1-1- 5.2 by Laws 2010, ch. 28, § 21.
ANNOTATIONS
Recompilations. — Laws 2010, ch. 28, § 21 recompiled former 1-9-4.2 NMSA 1978 as 1-1-5.2 NMSA 1978, effective March 3, 2010.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 2006–2010 · leading case: State ex rel. League v. Herrera, 203 P.3d 94 (N.M. 2009).
State ex rel. League v. Herrera, 203 P.3d 94 (N.M. 2009). “By excluding any additional consideration of voter intent, this rule effectively eliminated Subsection (B)(4) from Section 1-9-4.2. It also contradicted the Secretary's earlier guidelines, Instruction 2008-10, which provided specific rules as to when votes should be counted.”
Calkins v. Stearley, 2006-NMCA-153, 149 P.3d 118. “Significantly, Section 3-8-64(A) does not itself specify that the district court must find that the votes cast complied with Section 1-9-4.2; it states the district court must find the votes were "legal votes.”
State ex rel. League of Women Voters v. Herrera, 2009-NMSC-003, 145 N.M. 563. “By excluding any additional consideration of voter intent, this rule effectively eliminated Subsection (B)(4) from Section 1-9-4.2. It also contradicted the Secretary’s earlier guidelines, Instruction 2008-10, which provided specific rules as to when votes should be counted.”
Am. Ass'n of People with Disabilities v. Herrera, 690 F. Supp. 2d 1183 (D.N.M. 2010). “3d at 101 (ordering the Secretary to enforce election provision NMSA 1978, § 1-9-4.2 “as written and as interpreted by the Secretary’s guidelines”).”
Ass'n of People With Disabilities v. Herrera, 690 F. Supp. 2d 1183 (D.N.M. 2010). “3d at 101 (ordering the Secretary to enforce election provision NMSA 1978, § 1-9-4.2 "as written and as interpreted by the Secretary's guidelines").”
N.M. Stat. § 1-9-4.2(A): 1 case
Calkins v. Stearley, 2006-NMCA-153, 149 P.3d 118. “Significantly, Section 3-8-64(A) does not itself specify that the district court must find that the votes cast complied with Section 1-9-4.2; it states the district court must find the votes were "legal votes.”
N.M. Stat. § 1-9-4.2(B): 2 cases
State ex rel. League v. Herrera, 203 P.3d 94 (N.M. 2009). “By excluding any additional consideration of voter intent, this rule effectively eliminated Subsection (B)(4) from Section 1-9-4.2. It also contradicted the Secretary's earlier guidelines, Instruction 2008-10, which provided specific rules as to when votes should be counted.”
State ex rel. League of Women Voters v. Herrera, 2009-NMSC-003, 145 N.M. 563. “By excluding any additional consideration of voter intent, this rule effectively eliminated Subsection (B)(4) from Section 1-9-4.2. It also contradicted the Secretary’s earlier guidelines, Instruction 2008-10, which provided specific rules as to when votes should be counted.”
N.M. Stat. § 1-9-4.2(B)(4): 2 cases
State ex rel. League v. Herrera, 203 P.3d 94 (N.M. 2009). “By excluding any additional consideration of voter intent, this rule effectively eliminated Subsection (B)(4) from Section 1-9-4.2. It also contradicted the Secretary's earlier guidelines, Instruction 2008-10, which provided specific rules as to when votes should be counted.”
State ex rel. League of Women Voters v. Herrera, 2009-NMSC-003, 145 N.M. 563. “By excluding any additional consideration of voter intent, this rule effectively eliminated Subsection (B)(4) from Section 1-9-4.2. It also contradicted the Secretary’s earlier guidelines, Instruction 2008-10, which provided specific rules as to when votes should be counted.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.