New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 66-5-16 (2026)

Physical license to be carried and exhibited on demand

✓ current as of May 2026

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

Every licensee shall have the licensee's driver's license in its physical form in the licensee's immediate possession at all times when operating a motor vehicle and shall display the license in its physical form upon demand of a magistrate, a peace officer or a field deputy or inspector of the division. A person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a penalty assessment misdemeanor; however, a person charged with violating this section shall not be convicted if the person produces in court a driver's license in its physical form issued to the person and valid at the time of the person's citation.

History: 1953 Comp., § 64-5-16, enacted by Laws 1978, ch. 35, § 238; 1985, ch. 186, § 1; 2018, ch. 74, § 35; 2024, ch. 13, § 6.

ANNOTATIONS

Cross references. — For requirement that evidence of vehicle registration be exhibited on demand, see 66-3-13 NMSA 1978.

The 2024 amendment, effective May 15, 2024, required a physical driver's license to be carried and exhibited on demand by every licensee when operating a motor vehicle; in the section heading, added "Physical"; and after each occurrence of "license" added "in its physical form".

The 2018 amendment, effective July 1, 2018, provided a penalty for a violation of the provisions of this section, and made technical changes; and added "A person who violates the provisions of this section is guilt of a penalty assessment misdemeanor;".

Constitutionality. — Under Sections 66-2-12A(3), 66-3-13, and 66-5-16 NMSA 1978, a law enforcement officer is permitted to ask for a driver's license, registration, and proof of insurance once an officer stops an automobile for safety reasons. Those statutes are consistent with the constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures afforded by the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and N.M. Const., art. II, § 10. State v. Reynolds, 1995-NMSC-008, 119 N.M. 383, 890 P.2d 1315.

Section does not authorize random detention based on hunches. — Sections 64-3- 11 and 64-13-49, 1953 Comp. (similar to 66-3-13 NMSA 1978 and this section respectively), grant the police the unquestioned good faith right to detain motor vehicles for the purpose specified, but when the detention becomes an excuse for some other purpose which would not be lawful, the actions then become unreasonable. The statutes do not nor cannot authorize a random selection of motorists based on a "hunch" or a "guesstimate" that some law has been broken, as such would violate minimum federal constitutional standards. State v. Ruud, 1977-NMCA-072, 90 N.M. 647, 567 P.2d 496.

Random and routine check not unconstitutional. — There is no violation of constitutional standards where a state police officer in New Mexico stops the driver of a motor vehicle for the purpose of making a routine check of driver's license and vehicle registration on a random, or arbitrary basis, i.e., the officer having no reasonable suspicion that any law had been broken. United States v. Jenkins, 528 F.2d 713 (10th Cir. 1975), overruled by State v. Ruud, 90 N.M. 647, 567 P.2d 496 (Ct. App. 1977).

What constitutes a search. — Individuals have no legitimate subjective expectation of privacy in their license, registration, or insurance documents when they are operating a motor vehicle. Consequently, it is not a "search" to request those documents. State v. Reynolds, 1995-NMSC-008, 119 N.M. 383, 890 P.2d 1315.

Demanding proof of registration and display of license lawful. — Demanding proof of registration of the vehicle and the displayment of the driver's license were a lawful and necessary carrying out of the New Mexico statutes regulating motor vehicles and were not violative of minimum federal constitutional standards. United States v. Lepinski, 460 F.2d 234 (10th Cir. 1972), overruled by State v. Ruud, 1977-NMCA-072, 90 N.M. 647, 567 P.2d 496.

In conducting general license and registration checks under Sections 64-3-11 and 64- 13-49, 1953 Comp. (similar to Section 66-3-13 NMSA 1978 and this section respectively), the actions of the police must be in conformity with the constitutional requirements of the U.S. Const., amend. 4; and when the detention permitted by the statute becomes a mere subterfuge or excuse for some other purpose which would not be lawful the actions then become unreasonable and fail to meet the constitutional requirement. State v. Bloom, 1976-NMCA-035, 90 N.M. 226, 561 P.2d 925, rev'd, 1977- NMSC-016, 90 N.M. 192, 561 P.2d 465.

Person is not permitted to operate motor vehicle on basis of documents in his or her possession which could, upon performance of a ministerial function by a government official, lead to the issuance of a license. 1980 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 80-21.

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 7A Am. Jur. 2d Automobiles and Highway Traffic §§ 101, 147.

Validity and construction of statute making it a criminal offense for the operator of a motor vehicle not to carry or display his operator's license or the vehicle registration certificate, 6 A.L.R.3d 506.

60 C.J.S. Motor Vehicles § 157; 61A C.J.S. Motor Vehicles § 651.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 16 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1979–2023 · leading case: State v. Williams, 136 P.3d 579 (N.M. Ct. App. 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Williams, 136 P.3d 579 (N.M. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 9× “” NMSA 1978, § 66-5-16 (1985). Finally, the definitions of “operating” and “driver” do not distinguish between a moving vehicle and a nonmoving vehicle; the driver of a nonmoving vehicle, one who is in actual physical control, is operating a vehicle and is required to display a…”

United States v. Reyes-Vencomo, 866 F. Supp. 2d 1304 (D.N.M. 2012). · cites it 12× “The United States responded that there are two provisions in the vehicle code which reference unlicensed drivers, but noted that another provision in the New Mexico traffic code states that violations that are not otherwise penalized are considered misdemeanors.”

State v. Reynolds, 890 P.2d 1315 (N.M. 1995). · cites it 2× “See § 66-3-13 (stating that person operating vehicle shall display registration upon demand of police officer); § 66-5-16 (stating that person operating vehicle shall display license upon demand of police officer).”

State v. Anthony L., 433 P.3d 347 (N.M. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “It is NMSA 1978, Section 66-5-16 (1985, amended 2018) that requires that a licensee have a driver's license in their immediate possession.”

State v. Rubio, 136 P.3d 1022 (N.M. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “See NMSA 1978, § 66-5-16 (1985); see also NMSA 1978, § 66-5-2 (1989) (providing that all drivers must be licensed).”

State v. Anthony L., 2019 NMCA 3 (N.M. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “It is NMSA 1978, Section 66-5-16 (1985, amended 2018) that requires that a licensee have a driver’s license in their immediate possession.”

State v. Affsprung, 87 P.3d 1088 (N.M. Ct. App. 2004). “, NMSA 1978, § 66-3-13 (1978) (requiring every owner to exhibit registration evidence on demand of any police officer); § 66-5-16 (1985) (requiring every licensee to display his or her driver’s license upon demand of a peace officer); § 66 — 5— 205(B) (1998) (prohibiting persons…”

State v. Andrews, 934 P.2d 289 (N.M. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “See NMSA 1978, § 66-5-16 (Repl. Pamp.1994). The license must contain name, date of birth, and New Mexico residence address.”

United States v. Jacquez, 409 F. Supp. 2d 1286 (D.N.M. 2005). · cites it 2× “NMSA § 66-5-16 (1978), requires a licensee to have a driver’s license in immediate possession at all times when operating a motor vehicle.”

State v. Moore, 593 P.2d 760 (N.M. Ct. App. 1979). “1978, and driving without a driver’s license, see §§ 66-5-16 and 66-5-37, N.M.S.A.1978. The State asserts that “hot pursuit” is not limited to suspected felons; that the police could pursue and arrest defendant because he had committed misdemeanors in the presence of Brown.”

Holmes v. Town of Silver City Grant Cnty. New Mexico (D.N.M. 2019). · cites it 4× “A) charging Plaintiff with four counts: (1) intentionally resisting or abusing a peace officer in the lawful performance of his duties in violation of NMSA 1978 § 30-22-1 (misdemeanor); (2) driving without a valid driver’s license in violation of NMSA 1978 § 66-5-16 (misdemeanor…”

State v. Benavidez (N.M. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “The State 8 responds that the term “hold,” as used in the jury instruction, means to have in one’s 9 possession, as required by NMSA 1978, Section 66-5-16 (1985) (“Every licensee shall 10 have his driver’s license in his immediate possession at all times when operating a 11…”

Show all 16 citing cases →

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.