N.M. Stat. § 30-40-1 (2026)

obtain public assistance.
    A. Failing to disclose facts or change of circumstances to obtain public assistance
consists of a person knowingly failing to disclose a material fact known to be necessary
to determine eligibility for public assistance or knowingly failing to disclose a change in
circumstances for the purpose of obtaining or continuing to receive public assistance to
which the person is not entitled or in amounts greater than that to which the person is
entitled.

   B. Whoever commits failing to disclose facts or change of circumstances to obtain
public assistance when the value of the assistance wrongfully received is two hundred
fifty dollars ($250) or less in any twelve consecutive months is guilty of a petty
misdemeanor.

   C. Whoever commits failing to disclose facts or change of circumstances to obtain
public assistance when the value of the assistance wrongfully received is more than two
hundred fifty dollars ($250) but not more than five hundred dollars ($500) in any twelve
consecutive months is guilty of a misdemeanor.

   D. Whoever commits failing to disclose facts or change of circumstances to obtain
public assistance when the value of the assistance wrongfully received is more than five
hundred dollars ($500) but not more than two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) in
any twelve consecutive months is guilty of a fourth degree felony.

   E. Whoever commits failing to disclose facts or change of circumstances to obtain
public assistance when the value of the assistance wrongfully received is more than two
thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) but not more than twenty thousand dollars
($20,000) in any twelve consecutive months is guilty of a third degree felony.

   F. Whoever commits failing to disclose facts or change of circumstances to obtain
public assistance when the value of the assistance wrongfully received exceeds twenty
thousand dollars ($20,000) in any twelve consecutive months is guilty of a second
degree felony.

History: Laws 1979, ch. 170, § 1; 1987, ch. 121, § 12; 2006, ch. 29, § 18.

                                     ANNOTATIONS

The 2006 amendment, effective July 1, 2006, increased the value of the assistance in
Subsection B from $100 to $250; increased the value of the assistance in Subsection C
from more than $100, but not more than $250, and to more than $250, but not more
than $500; increased the value of the assistance in Subsection D from more than $250
to more than $500; and provided in Subsections E and F that the value of the
assistance is measured in a twelve consecutive month period.

This section is not unconstitutionally vague. State v. Fleming, 2006-NMCA-149, 140
N.M. 797, 149 P.3d 113, cert. denied, 2006-NMCERT-012, 141 N.M. 104, 151 P.3d 65.

The term "public assistance" includes public housing benefits. State v. Fleming,
2006-NMCA-149, 140 N.M. 797, 149 P.3d 113, cert. denied, 2006-NMCERT-012, 141
N.M. 104, 151 P.3d 65.

Multiple convictions of fraud violated defendant’s double jeopardy rights. —
Where defendant was charged with multiple counts of fraud and failure to disclose facts
to obtain public assistance, related to her application for and receipt of several forms of
public assistance benefits, including supplemental security income (SSI), social security
disability insurance (SSDI), medicaid, and food stamps (SNAP), and where defendant
claimed on appeal that her public assistance fraud convictions should be vacated
because the conduct supporting those convictions was the same conduct supporting the
general fraud convictions, defendant’s double jeopardy rights were violated, because
defendant’s conduct supporting the fraud charges and the public assistance fraud
charges was unitary, the general fraud was not complete before the public assistance
fraud was committed, the time and space for each overlapped, the quality and nature of
the acts were the same, the object and results of the acts were the same, and the mens
rea for the general fraud and the public assistance fraud were the same, and, under the
state’s theory of the case, the public assistance fraud convictions were subsumed within
the general fraud convictions. Punishment cannot be had for both fraud and public
assistance fraud in this case. State v. DeLaO, 2022-NMCA-064, cert. denied.

Mistake of fact instruction not warranted. — Where defendant was charged with
multiple counts of fraud and failure to disclose facts to obtain public assistance, related
to her application for and receipt of several forms of public assistance benefits, including
supplemental security income (SSI), social security disability insurance (SSDI),
medicaid, and food stamps (SNAP), and where defendant claimed on appeal that the
district court improperly refused to give a mistake of fact instruction based on
defendant’s theory that she mistakenly believed that by separately reporting her income
to the human services department [health care authority department] to satisfy a child
support obligation, she satisfied all of her reporting obligations, the district court properly
denied defendant’s requested instruction, because the general fraud instruction
adequately apprised the jury of the intent element of the crime and allowed it to consider
defendant’s theory of the case. State v. DeLaO, 2022-NMCA-064, cert. denied.