New Mexico Statutes
N.M. Stat. § 34-8A-3 (2026)
Metropolitan court; jurisdiction.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NM-LEGnmonesource.com
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
A. In addition to the jurisdiction provided by law for magistrate courts, a metropolitan
court shall have jurisdiction within the county boundaries over all:
(1) offenses and complaints pursuant to ordinances of the county and of a
municipality located within the county in which the court is located except municipalities
with a population of more than two thousand five hundred but less than five thousand
persons in the 1980 federal decennial census; provided that the metropolitan court shall
not have jurisdiction over uncontested municipal parking violations;
(2) civil actions in which the debt or sum claimed does not exceed ten
thousand dollars ($10,000), exclusive of interest and costs; and
(3) contested violations of parking or operation of vehicle rules promulgated
by a board of regents of a state educational institution designated in Article 12, Section
11 of the constitution of New Mexico located within the county in which the court is
located.
B. For the purposes of this section, "uncontested violation" is a violation for which a
citation has been issued and the person has paid the citation by mail or in person to the
appropriate issuing authority; and "contested violation" is a violation for which a citation
has been issued and the person has indicated his intent to contest the citation or the
person has not paid or answered the citation.
C. The issuing authority shall provide to the metropolitan court on a mutually agreed
schedule the unpaid citations and a listing in a manner mutually agreed upon of unpaid
citations.
D. The municipality shall retain as reimbursement for its expenses all revenues from
uncontested municipal parking violations.
History: Laws 1979, ch. 346, § 3; 1980, ch. 142, § 2; 1981, ch. 304, § 2; 1985, ch. 128,
§ 1; 1987, ch. 111, § 2; 1999, ch. 104, § 1; 2001, ch. 77, § 1.
ANNOTATIONS
Cross references. — For domestic violence offender treatment fund, see 31-12-12
NMSA 1978.
For costs of criminal processes associated with domestic abuse offenses, see 40-13-3.1
NMSA 1978.
The 2001 amendment, effective July 1, 2001, substituted "ten thousand dollars
($10,000)" for "seven thousand five hundred dollars ($7,500)" in Paragraph A(2); and
substituted "rules" for "regulations" in Paragraph A(3).
The 1999 amendment, effective, July 1, 1999, substituted "seven thousand five
hundred dollars ($7,500)" for "five thousand dollars ($5,000)" in Paragraph A(2).
Delay in enforcing sentence. — Where the court delayed enforcing defendant’s
sentence for thirteen months due to a mistake as to whether defendant was serving the
sentence during and after an appeal, the court did not lose jurisdiction to enforce the
sentence. State v. Calabaza, 2011-NMCA-053, 149 N.M. 612, 252 P.3d 836.
Service of writ of execution. — A writ of execution on a judgment of the former small
claims court may be served outside of the county where the court is created. 1963 Op.
Att'y Gen. No. 63-18 (opinion rendered under former law).
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — Small claims: jurisdictional limits as
binding on appellate court, 67 A.L.R.4th 1117.Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1981–2025 · leading case: Titus v. City of Albuquerque, 2011 NMCA 38 (N.M. Ct. App. 2011).
Titus v. City of Albuquerque, 2011 NMCA 38 (N.M. Ct. App. 2011). “{30} Titus also asserts that administrative enforcement of STOP is contrary to NMSA 1978, Section 34-8A-3(A)(1) (2001), which provides that the metropolitan court “shall have jurisdiction within the county boundaries over all .”
Martinez v. Sedillo, 107 P.3d 543 (N.M. Ct. App. 2005). “NMSA 1978, § 34-8A-3(A) (2001). The metropolitan court has jurisdiction over “civil actions in which the debt or sum claimed does not exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000), exclusive of interest and costs.”
State v. Lujan, 712 P.2d 13 (N.M. Ct. App. 1985). “See NMSA 1978, Section 34-8A-3 (Cum.Supp. 1985). Thus, the exception is applicable.”
Dalton v. Santander Consum. USA, Inc., 2015 NMCA 030 (N.M. Ct. App. 2015). “See NMSA 1978, § 35-3-3(A) (2001) (establishing the jurisdictional limits of the magistrate courts); NMSA 1978, § 34-8A-3(A)(2) (2001) (establishing jurisdictional limits of the metropolitan court).”
State v. Donahoo, 2006 NMCA 147 (N.M. Ct. App. 2006). “Accordingly, we agree with the district court’s analysis that as one of several co-equal metropolitan court judges, Judge Barnhart, absent some other disqualifying factor, had jurisdiction to act in this case.”
State v. Donahoo, 149 P.3d 104 (N.M. Ct. App. 2006). “Accordingly, we agree with the district court's analysis that as one of several co-equal metropolitan court judges, Judge Barnhart, absent some other disqualifying factor, had jurisdiction to act in this case.”
State v. Armijo, 2016 NMSC 021 (N.M. 2016). “See NMSA 1978, § 34-8A-1 (1979, amended 2010) (establishing a metropolitan court in counties with a population greater than two hundred thousand persons and, in 2010, raising the population threshold to two hundred fifty thousand, making Bernalillo County the only county to…”
Dalton v. Santander Consum. USA, Inc., 2016 NMSC 035 (N.M. 2016). “NMSA 1978, § 35-3-3(A) (2001); NMSA 1978, § 34-8A-3(A)(2) (2001). {4} Dalton did not make her first payment on the Pontiac contract and the Pontiac was almost immediately repossessed without judicial action in February 2011.”
State v. Crespin, 632 P.2d 1191 (N.M. Ct. App. 1981). “See § 34-8A-3, N.M. S.A. 1978 (1980 Cum.Supp.”
State v. Armijo, 2016 NMSC 21 (N.M. 2016). “See NMSA 1978, § 34-8A-1 (1979, amended 2010) (establishing a metropolitan court in counties with a population greater than two hundred thousand persons and, in 2010, raising the population threshold to two hundred fifty thousand, making Bernalillo County the only county to…”
Dalton v. Santander Consum. USA, Inc., 2016 NMSC 35 (N.M. 2016). “2 NMSA 1978, § 35-3-3(A) (2001); NMSA 1978, § 34-8A-3(A)(2) (2001). {4} Dalton did not make her first payment on the Pontiac contract and the Pontiac was almost immediately repossessed without judicial action in February 2011.”
Montoya v. Albuquerque (N.M. Ct. App. 2011). “The Class argues that 2 administrative enforcement of STOP is contrary to both NMSA 1978, Section 30-8- 3 8(B) (1963), and NMSA 1978, Section 34-8A-3(A)(1) (2001). We addressed whether 4 the former of these two provisions, Section 30-8-8(B), conflicted with STOP in Titus.”
— N.M. Stat. § 34-8A-3(A) — 5 cases
Martinez v. Sedillo, 107 P.3d 543 (N.M. Ct. App. 2005). “NMSA 1978, § 34-8A-3(A) (2001). The metropolitan court has jurisdiction over “civil actions in which the debt or sum claimed does not exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000), exclusive of interest and costs.”
State v. Armijo, 2016 NMSC 021 (N.M. 2016). “See NMSA 1978, § 34-8A-1 (1979, amended 2010) (establishing a metropolitan court in counties with a population greater than two hundred thousand persons and, in 2010, raising the population threshold to two hundred fifty thousand, making Bernalillo County the only county to…”
State v. Armijo, 2016 NMSC 21 (N.M. 2016). “See NMSA 1978, § 34-8A-1 (1979, amended 2010) (establishing a metropolitan court in counties with a population greater than two hundred thousand persons and, in 2010, raising the population threshold to two hundred fifty thousand, making Bernalillo County the only county to…”
Carmona v. ABQ 24 Hour Towing (N.M. Ct. App. 2023).
State v. Bhar (N.M. Ct. App. 2019).
— N.M. Stat. § 34-8A-3(A)(1) — 5 cases
Titus v. City of Albuquerque, 2011 NMCA 38 (N.M. Ct. App. 2011). “{30} Titus also asserts that administrative enforcement of STOP is contrary to NMSA 1978, Section 34-8A-3(A)(1) (2001), which provides that the metropolitan court “shall have jurisdiction within the county boundaries over all .”
Montoya v. Albuquerque (N.M. Ct. App. 2011). “The Class argues that 2 administrative enforcement of STOP is contrary to both NMSA 1978, Section 30-8- 3 8(B) (1963), and NMSA 1978, Section 34-8A-3(A)(1) (2001). We addressed whether 4 the former of these two provisions, Section 30-8-8(B), conflicted with STOP in Titus.”
Titus v. City of Albuquerque, 252 P.3d 780 (N.M. Ct. App. 2011).
State v. Page (N.M. Ct. App. 2016).
State v. Giannini (N.M. Ct. App. 2016).
— N.M. Stat. § 34-8A-3(A)(2) — 5 cases
Martinez v. Sedillo, 107 P.3d 543 (N.M. Ct. App. 2005). “NMSA 1978, § 34-8A-3(A) (2001). The metropolitan court has jurisdiction over “civil actions in which the debt or sum claimed does not exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000), exclusive of interest and costs.”
Dalton v. Santander Consum. USA, Inc., 2015 NMCA 030 (N.M. Ct. App. 2015). “See NMSA 1978, § 35-3-3(A) (2001) (establishing the jurisdictional limits of the magistrate courts); NMSA 1978, § 34-8A-3(A)(2) (2001) (establishing jurisdictional limits of the metropolitan court).”
Dalton v. Santander Consum. USA, Inc., 2016 NMSC 035 (N.M. 2016). “NMSA 1978, § 35-3-3(A) (2001); NMSA 1978, § 34-8A-3(A)(2) (2001). {4} Dalton did not make her first payment on the Pontiac contract and the Pontiac was almost immediately repossessed without judicial action in February 2011.”
Dalton v. Santander Consum. USA, Inc., 2016 NMSC 35 (N.M. 2016). “2 NMSA 1978, § 35-3-3(A) (2001); NMSA 1978, § 34-8A-3(A)(2) (2001). {4} Dalton did not make her first payment on the Pontiac contract and the Pontiac was almost immediately repossessed without judicial action in February 2011.”
Griego v. St. John Healthcare (N.M. Ct. App. 2013).
— N.M. Stat. § 34-8A-3(A)(l) — 1 case
Titus v. City of Albuquerque, 2011 NMCA 38 (N.M. Ct. App. 2011). “{30} Titus also asserts that administrative enforcement of STOP is contrary to NMSA 1978, Section 34-8A-3(A)(1) (2001), which provides that the metropolitan court “shall have jurisdiction within the county boundaries over all .”
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.