New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 34-9-1 (2026)

[Maintenance at seat of government; supervision;

✓ current as of May 2026

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

appointment and removal of director by supreme court.]
    The administrative office of the courts of New Mexico shall be maintained at the seat
of the government. It shall be supervised by a director who shall be appointed and
subject to removal by the supreme court of New Mexico.

History: 1953 Comp., § 16-6-1, enacted by Laws 1959, ch. 162, § 1.

                                     ANNOTATIONS

Cross references. — For contracting for services of counsel to act under Indigent
Defense Act, see 31-16-9 NMSA 1978.

Supreme court control over courts. — The supreme court has ultimate authority over
administrative matters of the courts. Russillo v. Scarborough, 935 F.2d 1167 (10th Cir.
1991).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1989–2023 · leading case: Duprey v. Twelfth Jud. Dist. Court, 760 F. Supp. 2d 1180 (D.N.M. 2009).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Duprey v. Twelfth Jud. Dist. Court, 760 F. Supp. 2d 1180 (D.N.M. 2009). · cites it 2× “See NMSA 1978 § 34-9-1, 2. The Administrative Office of the Courts is responsible for the administration of funds for the court automation fund, the jury—and witness-fee fund, the municipal-court automation fund, the magistrate— and metropolitan-court capital fund, the…”

Madrid v. St. Joseph Hosp., 928 P.2d 250 (N.M. 1996). “Laws ch. 152, § 35 (Law. Co-op Cum.Supp. 1996); Mont.”

Russillo v. Scarborough, 727 F. Supp. 1402 (D.N.M. 1989). · cites it 3× “” N.M.Stat.Ann. § 34-9-1 (1981). The AOC director, “under the supervision and direction of the supreme court” has the duty to “supervise all matters relating to administration of the courts.”

Aragon v. Vander Dussen (D.N.M. 2023). · cites it 2× “(citing N.M. Stat. Ann. § 34-9-1 ). Rather, “Magistrate courts, like the AOC itself, ‘operate under the direction and control of the supreme court and the district court of the judicial district in which the Court is located.”

— N.M. Stat. § 34-9-1(5) — 1 case

Madrid v. St. Joseph Hosp., 928 P.2d 250 (N.M. 1996). “Laws ch. 152, § 35 (Law. Co-op Cum.Supp. 1996); Mont.”

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.