NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is
intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the
legislature. The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume
responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for
other purposes.
The most recent FIR
version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative
Website. The Adobe PDF version includes
all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be
obtained from the LFC in
SPONSOR: |
Garcia |
DATE TYPED: |
|
HB |
175 |
||
SHORT TITLE: |
Prohibit Paid Surety Arrest |
SB |
|
||||
|
ANALYST: |
Fox-Young |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
FY03 |
FY04 |
FY03 |
FY04 |
|
|
|
|
|
NFI |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Parenthesis
( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Responses
Received From
Attorney
General (AG)
Administrative
Office of the District Attorneys (AODA)
Administrative
Office of the Courts (AOC)
SUMMARY
Synopsis
of Bill
House Bill 175 makes it a crime for a paid
surety to arrest an accused that has not been charged with a felony. The bill amends NMSA 1978, Section
A paid surety is defined as “(1) a person that
has taken money, property or other consideration by or on behalf of a person
charged with a crime in order to enter into a bail bond obligation benefiting
that person; or (2) an agent of a paid surety described in Paragraph (1)”