New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 31-8-1 (2026)

[Attendance of witnesses from without a state; definitions.]

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

"Witness," as used in this act [31-8-1 to 31-8-6 NMSA 1978], shall include a person whose testimony is desired in any proceeding or investigation by a grand jury or in a criminal action, prosecution or proceeding. The word "state" shall include any territory of the United States and District of Columbia.

The word "summons" shall include a subpoena, order or other notice requiring the appearance of a witness.

History: Laws 1937, ch. 66, § 1; 1941 Comp., § 42-1213; 1953 Comp., § 41-12-13.

ANNOTATIONS

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 81 Am. Jur. 2d Witnesses §§ 34, 35, 39.

Admissions to prevent continuance sought to secure testimony of absent witness in criminal case, 9 A.L.R.3d 1180.

Availability under Uniform Act to Secure the Attendance of Witnesses from Without a State in Criminal Proceedings of subpoena duces tecum, 7 A.L.R.4th 836.

Sufficiency of evidence to support or require finding that out-of-state witness in criminal case is "material witness" justifying certificate to secure attendances under Uniform Act to Secure the Attendance of Witnesses from Without a State in Criminal Proceedings, 12 A.L.R.4th 742.

Sufficiency of evidence to support or require finding that in-state witness in criminal case is "material and necessary" justifing issuance of summons directing attendance of witness under Uniform Act to Secure the Attendance of Witnesses from Without a State in Criminal Proceedings, 12 A.L.R.4th 771.

97 C.J.S. Witnesses § 17.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1972–2016 · leading case: State v. Case, 676 P.2d 241 (N.M. 1984).
State v. Case, 676 P.2d 241 (N.M. 1984). · cites it 2× “NMSA 1978, §§ 31-8-1 through 31-8-6. The defendant requested a continuance in order to have the witness flown in, or to allow defense counsel and the district attorney to go to Texas in order to depose the witness or in the alternative, to depose Kent through a conference call.”
State v.Thomas, 2016-NMSC-024, 10 N.M. 73. “icating that the one-week period 10 between defense counsel’s initial acquiescence and his reconsideration and objection 11 had anything to do with the State’s failure to invoke the complex and time-consuming 12 procedures in the courts of two states required by the Uniform Act…”
State v. Vialpando, 599 P.2d 1086 (N.M. Ct. App. 1979). “nd chronic lymphocytic leukemia, that she was not well enough to travel from Michigan to New Mexico for any further trial proceedings; a letter from the victim herself to the same effect and that the long trip, at her advanced age, would be dangerous to her health; a letter from…”
State v. Martinez, 691 P.2d 887 (N.M. Ct. App. 1984). “The prosecutors here immediately prepared a subpoena pursuant to the Uniform Act to Secure the Attendance of Witnesses from Without a State in Criminal Proceedings, NMSA 1978, Sections 31-8-1 to -6 (Repl.Pamp.1984), and sent it to Oklahoma by Federal Express.”
In Re Est. of Tarlton, 500 P.2d 180 (N.M. 1972). · cites it 2× “Appellant did not advance this claim by filing it in the manner prescribed by statute (§ 31-8-1 to 14, N.M.S.A., 1953). Instead, she advanced it by objecting to the final report filed by the appellee, demanding that the appellee be directed to pay that rent which accrued and…”
State v. Thomas, 2016-NMSC-024, 10 N.M. 73. · cites it 2× “nothing in the record indicating that the one-week period between defense counsel’s initial acquiescence and his reconsideration and objection had anything to do with the State’s failure to invoke the complex and time-consuming procedures in the courts of two states required by…”
Rush v. Strickland, 500 P.2d 180 (N.M. 1972). · cites it 2× “Appellant did not advance this claim by filing it in the manner prescribed by statute (§ 31-8-1 to 14, N.M.S.A., 1953). Instead, she advanced it by objecting to the final report filed by the appellee, demanding that the appellee be directed to pay that rent which accrued and…”
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.