A. Upon conviction, a defendant shall be liable for the reasonable cost of boarding
the animal and all necessary veterinary examinations and care provided to the animal.
The amount of these costs shall be offset by the security posted pursuant to Section 30-
18-1.2 NMSA 1978. Unexpended security funds shall be returned to the defendant.
B. In the absence of a conviction, the seizing agency shall bear the costs of
boarding the animal and all necessary veterinary examinations and care of the animal
during the pendency of the proceedings, return the animal, if not previously
relinquished, and all of the security posted pursuant to Section 30-18-1.2 NMSA 1978.
History: Laws 1999, ch. 107, § 4; 2009, ch. 43, § 2.
ANNOTATIONS
The 2009 amendment, effective June 19, 2009, in Subsection A, added "reasonable"
before "cost of boarding" and added the last two sentences; in Subsection B, added the
provision that the seizing agency shall return the animal and amounts of the security
posted.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
1
case, 2020–2020 · leading case:
State v. Alirez (N.M. Ct. App. 2020).
State v. Alirez (N.M. Ct. App. 2020).
· cites it 8× “And, because a defendant becomes liable for the full cost of this care upon conviction for cruelty to animals, NMSA 1978, § 30-18-1.3(A) (2009), the security provides the animal 2The district court, after noting that Defendant had been found to be indigent, believed that there…”
N.M. Stat. § 30-18-1.3(A): 1 case
State v. Alirez (N.M. Ct. App. 2020).
“And, because a defendant becomes liable for the full cost of this care upon conviction for cruelty to animals, NMSA 1978, § 30-18-1.3(A) (2009), the security provides the animal 2The district court, after noting that Defendant had been found to be indigent, believed that there…”
N.M. Stat. § 30-18-1.3(B): 1 case
State v. Alirez (N.M. Ct. App. 2020).
“And, because a defendant becomes liable for the full cost of this care upon conviction for cruelty to animals, NMSA 1978, § 30-18-1.3(A) (2009), the security provides the animal 2The district court, after noting that Defendant had been found to be indigent, believed that there…”
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.