It is the duty of the sheriffs, jail administrators as defined in Section 4-44-19 NMSA 1978 or independent contractors in charge of the jails of the state to compel the prisoners who are sentenced to imprisonment in the jails to work on public projects without pay or remuneration whatsoever. A prisoner may be compelled to work a maximum of eight hours in a twenty-four-hour period; provided that a work period is followed by a rest period of a minimum of eight hours. No prisoner shall be compelled to work on Sundays and legal holidays. This work may be considered for good time reduction as provided in Section 33-3-9 NMSA 1978.

History: Laws 1909, ch. 89, § 1; Code 1915, § 3052; C.S. 1929, § 75-121; 1941 Comp., § 45-217; 1953 Comp., § 42-2-17; Laws 1983, ch. 181, § 15; 1984, ch. 22, § 15; 1985, ch. 24, § 1.

Cross references. — For the constitutional prohibition of leasing of convict labor by the state, see N.M. Const., art. XX, § 18.

Constitutionality of good time credit scheme. — New Mexico's good time credit statutory scheme does not offend the constitutional guarantee of equal protection of the law; it is reasonable not to award good time credits for presentence confinement to detainees who are presumed innocent and therefore are not yet subject to rehabilitation efforts or to compulsory labor requirements, especially when they are held without systematic evaluation in county jails lacking rehabilitation programs. State v. Aqui, 1986-NMSC-048, 104 N.M. 345, 721 P.2d 771, cert. denied, 479 U.S. 917, 107 S. Ct. 321, 93 L. Ed. 2d 294 (1986).

Constitutionality of disallowing presentence good time credit. — Failure to allow good time credit for presentence confinement does not subject a prisoner to double jeopardy. Enright v. State, 1986-NMSC-070, 104 N.M. 672, 726 P.2d 349.

New Mexico's statutory scheme, which does not allow good time credit for presentence confinement, does not offend the equal protection and due process guarantees of the New Mexico and United States constitutions. Enright v. State, 1986-NMSC-070, 104 N.M. 672, 726 P.2d 349.

Escape from work detail. — Where defendant was assigned to a work detail at a county fairgrounds while serving a lawful sentence at a county jail, and it was while so assigned that the defendant escaped, the defendant is guilty of escape from jail. State v. Gilman, 1981-NMCA-123, 97 N.M. 67, 636 P.2d 886, cert. denied, 97 N.M. 483, 641 P.2d 514.

When county and board members not liable for injuries to prisoners. — In the absence of a statute whereby liability and permission to sue a creature of the state is provided, neither the county nor individual members of a board of county commissioners are liable for injuries sustained by prisoners engaged in maintenance work of courthouse grounds. 1957 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 57-220.

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 60 Am. Jur. 2d Penal and Correctional Institutions §§ 162 to 173.

18 C.J.S. Convicts §§ 13 to 15; 72 C.J.S. Prisons and Rights of Prisoners §§ 124 to 129.