A. All actions to enforce any ordinance of any municipality shall be brought in the name of the municipality as plaintiff. No prosecution, conviction or acquittal for the violation of an ordinance is a defense to any other prosecution of the same party for any other violation of an ordinance, although different causes of action existed at the same time and, if united, would have exceeded the jurisdiction of the court.
B. The plaintiff or defendant may appeal to the district court from the judgment of any municipal court within fifteen days after judgment and sentence rendered in the municipal court. Failure of either party to appeal within the prescribed time is jurisdictional and an appeal not timely filed shall not be entertained by the district court.
History: Laws 1884, ch. 39, § 17; C.L. 1884, § 1625; C.L. 1897, § 2405; Code 1915, § 3627; C.S. 1929, § 90-907; 1941 Comp., § 39-201; 1953 Comp., § 38-1-1; Laws 1959, ch. 169, § 1; 1961, ch. 208, § 10; 1963, ch. 10, § 1; 1969, ch. 35, § 1.
No chilling effect on right to appeal. — There was no "chilling effect" on defendant's right to appeal his conviction for violation of certain municipal ordinances where he took an appeal to the district court and requiring defendant to choose between accepting the risk of a greater sentence or foregoing his appeal was not constitutionally impermissible under the facts of the case since the choice was defendant's. City of Farmington v. Sandoval, 1977-NMCA-022, 90 N.M. 246, 561 P.2d 945.
Validity of ordinances authorizing commitment. — If a fine is imposed, an order may be made for commitment until the fine and costs are paid; although such proceedings are not criminal, being at most quasi-criminal, ordinances authorizing commitment are valid. In re Roe Chung, 1897-NMSC-016, 9 N.M. 130, 49 P. 952.
City attorney may represent municipality. — City attorney may prosecute violations of municipal ordinances in district court without authorization from the district attorney. City of Roswell v. Smith, cert. denied, 2006-NMCA-040, 139 N.M. 381, 133 P.3d 271, 2006-NMCERT-004, 139 N.M. 429, 134 P.3d 120.
Docket fee only applicable to appeals brought under this article. — A docket fee is applicable to appeals from the municipal court to the district court only when brought from an action enforcing ordinances under 35-15-1 NMSA 1978 et seq. 1980 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 80-18.
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 56 Am. Jur. 2d Municipal Corporations, Counties and Other Political Subdivisions § 414.
62 C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 322, 325, 930.
Copyright ©2024 LegalFix. All rights reserved. LegalFix is not a law firm, is not licensed to practice law, and does not provide legal advice, services, or representation. The information on this website is an overview of the legal plans you can purchase—or that may be provided by your employer as an employee benefit or by your credit union or other membership group as a membership benefit.
LegalFix provides its members with easy access to affordable legal services through a network of independent law firms. LegalFix, its corporate entity, and its officers, directors, employees, agents, and contractors do not provide legal advice, services, or representation—directly or indirectly.
The articles and information on the site are not legal advice and should not be relied upon—they are for information purposes only. You should become a LegalFix member to get legal services from one of our network law firms.
You should not disclose confidential or potentially incriminating information to LegalFix—you should only communicate such information to your network law firm.
The benefits and legal services described in the LegalFix legal plans are not always available in all states or with all plans. See the legal plan Benefit Overview and the more comprehensive legal plan contract during checkout for coverage details in your state.
Use of this website, the purchase of legal plans, and access to the LegalFix networks of law firms are subject to the LegalFix Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.