New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 9-3-5 (2026)

Secretary; duties and general powers.

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
A. The secretary of corrections is responsible to the governor for the operation of
the corrections department. It is his duty to manage all operations of the department
and to administer and enforce the laws with which he or the department is charged.

   B. To perform his duties, the secretary has every power expressly enumerated in
the laws, whether granted to the secretary of the department or any division of the
department, except where authority conferred upon any division is explicitly exempted
from the secretary's authority by statute. In accordance with these provisions, the
secretary shall:
      (1)    except as otherwise provided in the Corrections Department Act, exercise
general supervisory and appointing authority over all department employees, subject to
any applicable personnel laws and regulations;

      (2)     delegate authority to subordinates as he deems necessary and
appropriate, clearly delineating such delegated authority and the limitations thereto;

       (3)     organize the department into those organizational units he deems will
enable it to function most efficiently, subject to any provisions of law requiring or
establishing specific organizational units;

      (4)    within the limitations of available appropriations and applicable laws,
employ and fix the compensation of those persons necessary to discharge his duties;

       (5)    take administrative action by issuing orders and instructions, not
inconsistent with the law, to assure implementation of and compliance with the
provisions of law for whose administration or execution he is responsible and to enforce
those orders and instructions by appropriate administrative action or actions in the
courts;

      (6)   conduct research and studies that will improve the operations of the
department and the provision of services to the citizens of the state;

       (7)     provide courses of instruction and practical training for employees of the
department and other persons involved in the administration of programs with the
objective of improving the operations and efficiency of administration;

       (8)      prepare an annual budget of the department;

      (9)     provide cooperation, at the request of heads of administratively attached
agencies, in order to:

             (a) minimize or eliminate duplication of services and jurisdictional conflicts;

             (b) coordinate activities and resolve problems of mutual concern; and

           (c) resolve by agreement the manner and extent to which the department
shall provide budgeting, record-keeping and related clerical assistance to
administratively attached agencies;

        (10) appoint, with the governor's consent, a "director" for each division. These
appointed positions are exempt from the provisions of the Personnel Act [Chapter 10,
Article 9 NMSA 1978]. Persons appointed to these positions shall serve at the pleasure
of the secretary;
       (11) give bond as provided in the Surety Bond Act [10-2-13 to 10-2-16 NMSA
1978]. The department shall pay the costs of the bonds; and

       (12) require performance bonds of such department employees and officers as
he deems necessary, as provided in the Surety Bond Act. The department shall pay the
costs of the bonds.

   C. The secretary may apply for and receive, with the governor's approval, in the
name of the department any public or private funds, including United States government
funds, available to the department to carry out its programs, duties or services.

   D. Where functions of departments overlap or a function assigned to one
department could better be performed by another department, a secretary may
recommend appropriate legislation to the next session of the legislature for its approval.

    E. The secretary may make and adopt such reasonable and procedural rules and
regulations as may be necessary to carry out the duties of the department and its
divisions. No rule or regulation promulgated by the director of any division in carrying
out the functions and duties of the division shall be effective until approved by the
secretary. Unless otherwise provided by statute, no regulation affecting any person or
agency outside the department shall be adopted, amended or repealed without a public
hearing on the proposed action before the secretary or a hearing officer designated by
him. The public hearing shall be held in Santa Fe unless otherwise permitted by statute.
Notice of the subject matter of the regulation, the action proposed to be taken, the time
and place of the hearing, the manner in which interested persons may present their
views and the method by which copies of the proposed regulation, proposed
amendment or repeal of an existing regulation may be obtained shall be published once
at least thirty days prior to the hearing date in a newspaper of general circulation and
mailed at least thirty days prior to the hearing date to all persons who have made a
written request for advance notice of hearing. All rules and regulations shall be filed in
accordance with the State Rules Act [Chapter 14, Article 4 NMSA 1978].

   F. Behavioral health services, including mental health and substance abuse
services, provided by the department for persons under the department's supervision
shall be in compliance with the requirements of Section 9-7-6.4 NMSA 1978.

History: 1978 Comp., § 9-3-5, enacted by Laws 1977, ch. 257, § 6; 1979, ch. 202, § 3;
1980, ch. 150, § 5; 1981, ch. 73, § 5; 2004, ch. 46, § 4.

                                    ANNOTATIONS

Cross references. — For appointment of directors, see 9-3-6 NMSA 1978.

For state budgets, see 6-3-1 to 6-3-25 NMSA 1978.

For public officers and employees generally, see Chapter 10 NMSA 1978.
The 2004 amendment, effective May 19, 2004, added Subsection F.

No disparate treatment of employees in application DWI policy. — Where the
employer adopted a DWI policy which required employees to self-report DWI offenses,
required dismissal for a second DWI offense, and provided that discipline for DWI did
not depend on conviction; plaintiff was arrested twice for suspicion of aggravated DWI
after the policy became effective and self-reported the arrests; the criminal charges for
both arrests were ultimately dismissed without a finding of guilt or innocence; plaintiff
was dismissed after the second arrest for DWI; plaintiff claimed that the employer
treated plaintiff differently than other employees; one employee had two prior DWI
arrests, but only one arrest after the policy became effective; a second employee was
rumored to have three or four DWIs, but never reported the DWIs and the employer had
no record of the offenses; with one exception, plaintiff was treated the same as other
employees who, after the policy become effective, self-reported a second DWI and were
dismissed; and the one exception was an employee who was arrested twice for DWI
after the policy became effective, but who was not terminated because at that time, the
employer was reviewing the policy and had not determined that termination was
appropriate for a second offense, plaintiff’s termination was appropriate because the
employer placed substantial evidence in the record to justify the action taken and to
explain the alleged differences in the treatment of other employees. Sais v. N.M. Dep't
of Corr., 2012-NMSC-009, 275 P.3d 104.

Applicability of State Rules Act to disciplinary rules for prisoners. — Disciplinary
rules promulgated by the secretary of corrections, governing the conduct of prisoners
confined within a penitentiary, were not required to be filed with the state's record center
in the manner required under the State Rules Act. Johnson v. Francke, 1987-NMCA-
029, 105 N.M. 564, 734 P.2d 804.

Status of secretary of corrections. — The secretary of corrections is not a "law
enforcement officer" for purposes of the Tort Claims Act, Section 41-4-3 NMSA 1978.
Anchondo v. Corrections Dep't, 1983-NMSC-051, 100 N.M. 108, 666 P.2d 1255.

Rules promulgated pursuant to statutory authority may have force and effect of
law. 1980 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 80-04.

No responsibility by state records center to determine compliance of
promulgated rules with hearing and notice requirements. 1978 Op. Att'y Gen. No.
78-07.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1983–2026 · leading case: Johnson v. Francke, 734 P.2d 804 (N.M. Ct. App. 1987).
Johnson v. Francke, 734 P.2d 804 (N.M. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 13× “As noted by respondent, “It is difficult to envision how the Legislature could have made it more clear that rules relating to the management, confinement, discipline or release of inmates are not subject to filing under the State Rules Act.”
Anchondo v. Corr. Dep't, 666 P.2d 1255 (N.M. 1983). · cites it 6× “According to these statutory provisions the Secretary of Corrections must manage all operations of the department (§ 9-3-5 A), exercise general supervisory authority over all department employees (§ 9-3-5 B(l)), delegate authority to subordinates as he deems necessary (§ 9-3-5…”
Am. Civ. Liberties Union of N.M. v. N.M. Corr. Dep't (N.M. 2026). · cites it 25× “NMCD argues that its policies are authorized by the 13 Corrections Department Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 9-3-1 to -13 (1977, as amended 14 through 2019), in Section 9-3-5(E), and by the Corrections Act in Section 33-1-6(B).”
Robinson v. Centurion Corr. Healthcare of New Mexico, LLC (D.N.M. 2023). · cites it 5× “”) Plaintiff’s allegations sufficiently establish the requisite affirmative link between these deficiencies in the prison medical care system to each NMCD Defendant. Starting with Secretary Joblinski, the State of New Mexico invests the Secretary with managing “all operations of…”
Am. Civ. Liberties Union of N.M. v. N.M. Corr. Dep't (N.M. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 5× “The ACLU argued that NMCD improperly relied on its enabling statutes—NMSA 1978, § 33-1-6 (1981) and NMSA 1978, § 9-3-5(E) (2004)— to refuse to produce the documents under the catch-all exception to disclosure.”
Bradshaw v. Mgmt. & Training Corp. (D.N.M. 2023). · cites it 3× “CD-170000 and 1761000, and New Mexico Statutes Annotated Sections 9-3-5(A), 9-3-5(B), 33-1-6(B), 33-1-10, and 32-2-11.”
— N.M. Stat. § 9-3-5(A) — 1 case
Bradshaw v. Mgmt. & Training Corp. (D.N.M. 2023). “CD-170000 and 1761000, and New Mexico Statutes Annotated Sections 9-3-5(A), 9-3-5(B), 33-1-6(B), 33-1-10, and 32-2-11.”
— N.M. Stat. § 9-3-5(E) — 3 cases
Johnson v. Francke, 734 P.2d 804 (N.M. Ct. App. 1987). “As noted by respondent, “It is difficult to envision how the Legislature could have made it more clear that rules relating to the management, confinement, discipline or release of inmates are not subject to filing under the State Rules Act.”
Am. Civ. Liberties Union of N.M. v. N.M. Corr. Dep't (N.M. 2026). “NMCD argues that its policies are authorized by the 13 Corrections Department Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 9-3-1 to -13 (1977, as amended 14 through 2019), in Section 9-3-5(E), and by the Corrections Act in Section 33-1-6(B).”
Am. Civ. Liberties Union of N.M. v. N.M. Corr. Dep't (N.M. Ct. App. 2024). “The ACLU argued that NMCD improperly relied on its enabling statutes—NMSA 1978, § 33-1-6 (1981) and NMSA 1978, § 9-3-5(E) (2004)— to refuse to produce the documents under the catch-all exception to disclosure.”
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.