N.M. Stat. » Chapter 30 — Criminal Offenses
New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 30-9-18 (2026)

Alleged victims who are under thirteen years of age;

✓ laws through the 2025 session (retrieved May 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

psychological evaluation. In any prosecution for criminal sexual penetration or criminal sexual contact of a minor, if the alleged victim is under thirteen years of age, the court may hold an evidentiary hearing to determine whether to order a psychological evaluation of the alleged victim on the issue of competency as a witness. If the court determines that the issue of competency is in sufficient doubt that the court requires expert assistance, then the court may order a psychological evaluation of the alleged victim, provided however, that if a psychological evaluation is ordered it shall be conducted by only one psychologist or psychiatrist selected by the court who may be utilized by either or both parties; further provided that if the alleged victim has been evaluated on the issue of competency during the course of investigation by a psychologist or psychiatrist selected in whole or in part by law enforcement officials, the psychological evaluation, if any, shall be conducted by a psychologist or psychiatrist selected by the court upon the recommendation of the defense.

History: Laws 1987, ch. 118, § 1.

ANNOTATIONS

Victim’s past allegations against a third party. — Where the trial court excluded evidence of the victim’s past allegations against a third party which related to the victim’s reputation for past sexual conduct, the victim made the allegations against the third party in the past; the circumstances of the prior incident in no way resembled the allegations that led to the charges against the defendant; the defendant did not show that the circumstances of the prior allegations were clearly relevant to any material issue in the defendant’s case other than propensity; and the defendant did not show how the prior allegations related to the defendant’s defense, the trial court properly excluded the evidence. State v. Casillas, 2009-NMCA-034, 145 N.M. 783, 205 P.3d 830, cert. denied, 2009-NMCERT-003, 146 N.M. 603, 213 P.3d 507.

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — Witnesses: child competency statutes, 60 A.L.R.4th 369.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2009–2016 · leading case: State v. Casillas, 2009-NMCA-034, 145 N.M. 783.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Casillas, 2009-NMCA-034, 145 N.M. 783. · cites it 4× “{5} A few days prior to trial, Defendant filed a motion asking the court to order a psychological evaluation of Victim pursuant to NMSA 1978, § 30-9-18 (1987). The motion was based upon several of Victim’s statements from the OASIS interview and Victim’s mother’s testimony about…”
State v. Casillas, 205 P.3d 830 (N.M. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 4× “{5} A few days prior to trial, Defendant filed a motion asking the court to order a psychological evaluation of Victim pursuant to NMSA 1978, § 30-9-18 (1987). The motion was based upon several of Victim's statements from the OASIS interview and Victim's mother's testimony about…”
State v. Perez, 2016-NMCA-033, 367 P.3d 909. · cites it 4× “{4} At the hearing, the prosecutor maintained that competency was not an issue, while defense counsel stated that a psychological evaluation was appropriate pursuant to NMSA 1978, Section 30-9-18 (1987). 1 The district court ordered a psychological evaluation of C.”
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.