New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 4-41-9 (2026)

Powers of deputy sheriff.

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Deputies are authorized to discharge all the duties that belong to the office of sheriff
that may be placed under their charge by their principals, with the same effect as
though they were executed by the respective sheriffs. If there is a vacancy in the office
of sheriff, the highest-ranking deputy sheriff or under-sheriff, who is qualified to hold the
office of sheriff, shall exercise the powers of sheriff until a sheriff is appointed and
qualified.

History: Laws 1855-1856, ch. 2, § 3; C.L. 1865, ch. 99, § 11; C.L. 1884, § 403; C.L.
1897, § 740; Code 1915, § 1259; C.S. 1929, § 33-4415; 1941 Comp., § 15-3811; 1953
Comp., § 15-40-11; 1978 Comp., § 4-41-9, 2017, ch. 56, § 1.

                                      ANNOTATIONS

The 2017 amendment, effective April 6, 2017, authorized a deputy sheriff or under-
sheriff to exercise the powers of sheriff while there is a vacancy in the office of sheriff;
added the catchline "Powers of deputy sheriff"; in the first sentence, deleted "The said";
and, added the last sentence.

A "special deputy" does not necessarily lack the authority to serve a writ of
execution or make levy pursuant to writ. Novak v. Dow, 1970-NMCA-104, 82 N.M. 30,
474 P.2d 712.

Use of force in making arrest. — Large rocks, hurled by misdemeanant at deputy
sheriff in resisting arrest, were dangerous weapons, justifying resort to extreme
measures on part of deputy. State v. Vargas, 1937-NMSC-049,42 N.M. 1, 74 P.2d 62,
distinguished in State v. Gabaldon, 1939-NMSC-060, 43 N.M. 525, 96 P.2d 293.

Jury instruction as to status of deputy sheriff. — In murder prosecution in which
there was a question as to whether the defendant was a deputy sheriff acting to perfect
or enforce an arrest when the killing occurred, instructions leaving question whether
defendant was a deputy sheriff to the jury were proper where there was no direct
evidence that such was the case. Territory v. Kimmick, 1910-NMSC-058, 15 N.M. 178,
106 P. 381.
County sheriff was not liable in damage suit for false return of service by deputy
sheriff, either on the theory that deputy acted by virtue of the deputy's office, since
plaintiffs had the burden of proving that service of civil process was within the authority
of deputy, and they had failed to find any evidence that would meet that burden, or on
the theory that deputy acted under color of the deputy's office, since representations
which led plaintiffs to believe that they were dealing with sheriff's office did not occur
during defendant-sheriff's term of office. Karr v. Dow, 1973-NMCA-016, 84 N.M. 708,
507 P.2d 455, cert. denied, 84 N.M. 696, 507 P.2d 443.

Deputy sheriffs may not exercise any power other than those delegated by the
sheriff, and, therefore, the deputy sheriff does not exercise his powers and duties
independently of a superior power, nor is he subject only to the general control of a
power placed over him by the legislature. The detailed supervision and control
exercised over deputy sheriffs by their sheriffs eliminate the office of deputy sheriff from
the category of a public office and place it in the category of public employment. 1960
Op. Att'y Gen. No. 60-222.

Duties of public weighmasters. — Deputy sheriffs, in their official capacity, are
required to perform the duties of public weighmasters when so designated by the
sheriffs, and are not to receive for their own use any fees or other extra compensation
for their services. 1931 Op. Att'y Gen. 31-183.

Disposition of fees recovered by deputies in connection with performance of
duties. — Deputy sheriffs are entitled to no other compensation for the performance of
their duties, which includes the service of civil and criminal papers as authorized by
statute, than their salaries, and all fees recovered by them in connection with the
performance of such duties must be remitted to the county treasurers of their respective
counties. 1954 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 54-6033.

Law reviews. — For article, "Attachment in New Mexico - Part II," see 2 Nat.
Resources J. 75 (1962).

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 70 Am. Jur. 2d Sheriffs, Police, and
Constables §§ 9, 50, 63.

80 C.J.S. Sheriffs and Constables §§ 57 to 60.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1985–2015 · leading case: State v. Gutierrez, 699 P.2d 1078 (N.M. Ct. App. 1985).
State v. Gutierrez, 699 P.2d 1078 (N.M. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “NMSA 1978, Section 4-41-9 (Repl.Pamp. 1984): A deputy may do what a sheriff may do.”
State v. Tabaha, 714 P.2d 1010 (N.M. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 2× “1985) (municipal police officers shall execute and serve certain writs, shall suppress breaches of the peace, shall apprehend certain persons, shall arrest certain persons, and shall have the same responsibilities as sheriffs); NMSA 1978, § 29-2-18 (Repl.”
State v. Tabaha, 714 P.2d 1010 (N.M. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 2× “1984) (sheriff shall be conservator of the peace, shall suppress assaults, shall apprehend and commit felons to jail, and shall cause offenders to keep the peace and appear in court); NMSA 1978, § 4-41-9 (Repl.Pamp. 1984) (deputy sheriffs are authorized to discharge duties of…”
State v. Marquez, 2007 NMCA 151 (N.M. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “1992) (stating that a city police officer who was commissioned by the county sheriff was permitted to serve process by the statute authorizing the sheriff to serve process); see also NMSA 1978, § 4-41-5 (1975) (authorizing county sheriffs to appoint deputies); NMSA 1978, §…”
Loya v. Gutierrez, 2015 NMSC 017 (N.M. 2015). · cites it 2× “See NMSA 1978, § 4-41-5 (1975) 12 (“Deputy sheriffs; appointment and term; merit system”); NMSA 1978, § 4-41-8 13 (1905) (“Deputy sheriff; qualifications; character; revocation of commission”); and 14 NMSA 1978, § 4-41-9 (1855-56) (“Deputy sheriffs; powers and duties”).”
State v. Marquez, 173 P.3d 1 (N.M. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “1992) (stating that a city police officer who was commissioned by the county sheriff was permitted to serve process by the statute authorizing the sheriff to serve process); see also NMSA 1978, § 4-41-5 (1975) (authorizing county sheriffs to appoint deputies); NMSA 1978, §…”
State v. Sanchez, 2014 NMCA 095 (N.M. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 4× “NMSA 1978, Section 4-41-9 (1855-1856) confirms that “[t]he said deputies are hereby authorized to discharge all the duties which belong to the office of sheriff, that may be placed under their charge by their principals!)]” See Novak v.”
Loya v. Gutierrez, 2015 NMSC 17 (N.M. 2015). · cites it 2× “See NMSA 1978, § 4-41-5 (1975) (“Deputy sheriffs; appointment and term; merit system”); NMSA 1978, § 4-41-8 (1905) (“Deputy sheriff; qualifications; character; revocation of commission”); and NMSA 1978, § 4-41-9 (1855-56) (“Deputy sheriffs; powers and duties”).”
State v. Sanchez, 2014 NMCA 95 (N.M. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 4× “Section 4-41-10 states that special deputies, as appointed by a county sheriff, may serve a particular order, writ, or process or, if the sheriff has so deemed “necessary and required for the purpose of preserving the peace,” may act as otherwise authorized.”
State v. Zamora (N.M. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “See NMSA 1978, § 4-41-9 (1953). 5 For the reasons set forth above, we affirm.”
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.