New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 32A-4-5 (2026)

Admissibility of report in evidence; immunity of reporting

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

person; investigation of report.
A. In any proceeding alleging neglect or abuse under the Children's Code resulting
from a report required by Section 32A-4-3 NMSA 1978 or in any proceeding in which
that report or any of its contents are sought to be introduced in evidence, the report or
its contents or any other facts related thereto or to the condition of the child who is the
subject of the report shall not be excluded on the ground that the matter is or may be
the subject of a physician-patient privilege or similar privilege or rule against disclosure.

B. Anyone reporting an instance of alleged child neglect or abuse or participating in
a judicial proceeding brought as a result of a report required by Section 32A-4-3 NMSA
1978 is presumed to be acting in good faith and shall be immune from liability, civil or
criminal, that might otherwise be incurred or imposed by the law, unless the person
acted in bad faith or with malicious purpose.

C. After properly verifying the identity of the public official, any school personnel or
other person who has the duty to report child abuse pursuant to Section 32A-4-3 NMSA
1978 shall permit a member of a law enforcement agency, including tribal police
officers, an employee of the district attorney's office, an investigative interviewer for a
program described in Subsection E of this section or an employee of the department, to
interview a child with respect to a report without the permission of the child's parent or
guardian. Any person permitting an interview pursuant to this subsection is presumed to
be acting in good faith and shall be immune from liability, civil or criminal, that might
otherwise be incurred or imposed by law, unless the person acted in bad faith or with
malicious purpose.

D. An investigation may be conducted by law enforcement, the district attorney's
office, a program described in Subsection E of this section and the department.
Interviews shall be conducted in a manner and place that protects the child and family
from unnecessary trauma and embarrassment. The investigating entity shall conduct
the investigation in a manner that will protect the privacy of the child and the family, with
the paramount consideration being the safety of the child. All interactions with child
victims and child witnesses shall be conducted in a child-sensitive manner, taking into
consideration the special needs of the child and the child's abilities, age and intellectual
maturity. The interviews shall be conducted in a place where the child feels secure and
in a language that the child uses and understands.

E. If a community has a program for child abuse investigation that includes an
investigation interview of the alleged victim or child witness, the investigation may be
conducted at a site designated by the community program. The child abuse victim or
child witness shall, when possible, be interviewed in an environment where the alleged
abuse perpetrator will not be present.

F. Prior to interviewing a child, the department shall notify the parent or guardian of
the child who is being interviewed, unless the department determines that notification
would adversely affect the safety of the child about whom the report has been made or
compromise the investigation.

History: 1978 Comp., § 32A-4-5, enacted by Laws 1993, ch. 77, § 99; 1995, ch. 206, §
22; 2005, ch. 189, § 40; 2009, ch. 239, § 34.

ANNOTATIONS

The 2009 amendment, effective July 1, 2009, in Subsection D, added the last
sentence; and in Subsection E, after "alleged victim", added "or child witness"; and
added the last sentence.

Applicability. — Laws 2009, ch. 239, § 71, provided that the provisions of this act apply
to all children who, on July 1, 2009, are on release or are otherwise eligible to be placed
on release as if the Juvenile Public Safety Advisory Board Act had been in effect at the
time they were placed on release or became eligible to be released.

The 2005 amendment, effective June 17, 2005, in Subsection C, deleted "custodian";
in Subsection D, provided that the investigating entity shall conduct the investigation in
a manner that will protect the privacy of the child and the family with paramount
consideration being the safety of the child; and added Subsection F, which provided that
prior to interviewing the child, the department shall notify the child's parent or guardian,
unless notification would adversely affect the safety of the child or compromise the
investigation.

The 1995 amendment, effective July 1, 1995, added "investigation of report" in the
section heading, added "an employee of the district attorney's office, an investigative
interviewer for a program described in Subsection E of this section" in Subsections C
and D, and added Subsection E.

Law reviews. — For comment, "The Freedom of the Press vs. The Confidentiality
Provisions in the New Mexico Children's Code," see 4 N.M.L. Rev. 119 (1973).

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — Validity, construction, and application of
statute limiting physician-patient privilege in judicial proceedings relating to child abuse
or neglect, 44 A.L.R.4th 649.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1997–2021 · leading case: State v. Strauch, 2015 NMSC 009 (N.M. Ct. App. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Strauch, 2015 NMSC 009 (N.M. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 3× “Before the 1990 amendment of Rule 11 -504, there was a potential conflict between our privilege rules and a provision, now encoded in NMSA 1978, Section 32A-4-5 (2009) of the Abuse and Neglect Act, that purported to legislate an exception to any applicable “physician-patient…”

State v. Strauch, 2015 NMSC 9 (N.M. 2015). · cites it 3× “{45} Before the 1990 amendment of Rule 11-504, there was a potential conflict between 14 our privilege rules and a provision, now encoded in NMSA 1978, Section 32A-4-5 (2009) of the Abuse and Neglect Act, that purported to legislate an exception to any applicable…”

State ex rel. Child., Youth & Families Dep't v. Pamela R.D.G., 2006 NMSC 019 (N.M. 2006). · cites it 2× “Although the legislation is silent on what role the parents may play during the interview, this may provide an adequate opportunity for parents or their attorneys to ask questions of the child through the safe house interviewer, provided careful procedures are in place to avoid…”

Eckhardt v. Charter Hosp. of Albuquerque, Inc., 953 P.2d 722 (N.M. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “, NMSA 1978, § 32A-4-5(B) (1995) (persons reporting child neglect or abuse “shall be immune from liability .”

In the Matter of Pamela AG, 134 P.3d 746 (N.M. 2006). “Although the legislation is silent on what role the parents may play during the interview, this may provide an adequate opportunity for parents or their attorneys to ask questions of the child through the safe house interviewer, provided careful procedures are in place to avoid…”

State v. Strauch, 2014 NMCA 020 (N.M. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 6× “The State relies on two statutes in support of this argument, Section 61-31 -24(C) and NMSA 1978, Section 32A-4-5 (2009). Defendant contends that these two statutory provisions are not applicable to criminal proceedings, and we agree.”

State v. Strauch, 2014 NMCA 20 (N.M. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 6× “The State relies on two statutes in support of this argument, Section 61-31-24(C) and NMSA 1978, Section 32A-4-5 (2009). Defendant contends that these two statutory provisions are not applicable to criminal proceedings, and we agree.”

State Ex Rel. CYFD v. Garrett R. (N.M. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 6× “The Safe House Interview {23} Father next points to a February 2020 “safe house” interview of Child and, from what we can discern, contends that he was not afforded certain protections under NMSA 1978, Section 32A-4-5(F) (2009) and Pamela A.G.”

State v. Strauch (N.M. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 6× “The State relies on two statutes in support of this argument, Section 61-31-24(C) and NMSA 1978, Section 32A-4-5 (2009). Defendant contends that these two statutory provisions are not applicable to criminal proceedings, and we agree.”

State v. Strauch (N.M. 2015). “” See § 32A-4-5(A); 1965 N.M. Laws, ch. 157, § 5 (original enactment 13 of this provision).”

— N.M. Stat. § 32A-4-5(A) — 6 cases

State v. Strauch, 2015 NMSC 009 (N.M. Ct. App. 2015). “Before the 1990 amendment of Rule 11 -504, there was a potential conflict between our privilege rules and a provision, now encoded in NMSA 1978, Section 32A-4-5 (2009) of the Abuse and Neglect Act, that purported to legislate an exception to any applicable “physician-patient…”

State v. Strauch, 2015 NMSC 9 (N.M. 2015). “{45} Before the 1990 amendment of Rule 11-504, there was a potential conflict between 14 our privilege rules and a provision, now encoded in NMSA 1978, Section 32A-4-5 (2009) of the Abuse and Neglect Act, that purported to legislate an exception to any applicable…”

State v. Strauch, 2014 NMCA 020 (N.M. Ct. App. 2014). “The State relies on two statutes in support of this argument, Section 61-31 -24(C) and NMSA 1978, Section 32A-4-5 (2009). Defendant contends that these two statutory provisions are not applicable to criminal proceedings, and we agree.”

State v. Strauch, 2014 NMCA 20 (N.M. Ct. App. 2013). “The State relies on two statutes in support of this argument, Section 61-31-24(C) and NMSA 1978, Section 32A-4-5 (2009). Defendant contends that these two statutory provisions are not applicable to criminal proceedings, and we agree.”

State v. Strauch (N.M. Ct. App. 2013). “The State relies on two statutes in support of this argument, Section 61-31-24(C) and NMSA 1978, Section 32A-4-5 (2009). Defendant contends that these two statutory provisions are not applicable to criminal proceedings, and we agree.”

— N.M. Stat. § 32A-4-5(B) — 1 case

Eckhardt v. Charter Hosp. of Albuquerque, Inc., 953 P.2d 722 (N.M. Ct. App. 1997). “, NMSA 1978, § 32A-4-5(B) (1995) (persons reporting child neglect or abuse “shall be immune from liability .”

— N.M. Stat. § 32A-4-5(F) — 1 case

State Ex Rel. CYFD v. Garrett R. (N.M. Ct. App. 2021). “The Safe House Interview {23} Father next points to a February 2020 “safe house” interview of Child and, from what we can discern, contends that he was not afforded certain protections under NMSA 1978, Section 32A-4-5(F) (2009) and Pamela A.G.”

— N.M. Stat. § 32A-4-5(F)(2005) — 2 cases

State ex rel. Child., Youth & Families Dep't v. Pamela R.D.G., 2006 NMSC 019 (N.M. 2006). “Although the legislation is silent on what role the parents may play during the interview, this may provide an adequate opportunity for parents or their attorneys to ask questions of the child through the safe house interviewer, provided careful procedures are in place to avoid…”

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.