Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance

committees of the NM Legislature. The LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports

if they are used for other purposes.

Current FIRs (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) are a vailable on the NM Legislative Website (legis.state.nm.us).

Adobe PDF versions include all attachments, whereas HTML versions may not. Previously issued FIRs and

attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.

F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T

SPONSOR Beam

DATE TYPED 3/3/05

HB 576/aHJC

SHORT TITLE Abolish Death Penalty

SB

ANALYST Medina

APPROPRIATION

Appropriation Contained Estimated Additional Impact Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY05

FY06

FY05

FY06

NFI

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

Conflicts with SB 173

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC Files

Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)

Administrative Office of the District Attorney (AODA)

Attorney General (AG)

Corrections Department (CD)

SUMMARY

Synopsis of HJC Amendment

The House Judiciary Committee amendment adds a section of applicability, which states that the

provisions of the bill apply to a person convicted of a capital felony on or after July 1, 2005.

Synopsis of Bill

House Bill 576 amends and repeals sections of Chapter 31 NMSA 1978 abolishing the penalty of

death for persons convicted of a capital felony. The bill substitutes the penalty of punishment by

death with a sentence of life imprisonment without possibility of release or parole. The sentence

of life imprisonment with parole would still exist under this bill although an inmate serving this

sentence would be eligible for parole only after serving thirty years of incarceration.

This bill repeals Sections 31-14-1 through 31-14-16, 31-18-14.1, 31-20A-2.1 through 31-20A-4,

and 31-20A-6 NMSA 1978, the sections relating to capital felony sentencing, capital felony

House Bill 576/aHJC -- Page 2

cases heard by jury, and the execution of the death sentence.

Significant Issues

In New Mexico, the only capital felony is first-degree murder. According to the Attorney Gen-

eral’s Office, this measure also repeals the existing provisions for carrying out the death penalty,

Sections 31-14-1 through 31-14-16 NMSA 1978, despite the fact that there are inmates on death

row at present. Those provisions probably should not be repealed even if this bill is enacted until

existing death sentences are either carried out or vacated by the courts. The legislature does not

have authority to effectively commute existing death sentences by repealing procedures for in-

flicting a penalty. (N.M. Const. Art. IV, Sections 33 & 34.)

PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS

According to the Corrections Department, the bill could result in a moderate placement burden

on the department. Because the department currently operates all of its facilities at or near capac-

ity, it would be difficult for the department to continually absorb new offenders who have been

sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of release or parole.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

The Corrections Department contends that because the medical costs for inmates increase sub-

stantially as inmates reach the end of their lives, this bill will create additional costs related to

inmate care. However, since there have been only two death penalty sentences have been carried

out in the last thirty-five years, the fiscal impact to the department would be insignificant.

According to AOC, Moreover, to assemble a jury for a death penalty case, the district court will

summon as many as one thousand (1,000) people. An estimate of what a death penalty case cost

for the jury and witness fee fund is approximately $20,000-$25,000. In contrast, a non-death

penalty murder case cost approximately $7,000-$8,000.

ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS

A larger prison population could result due to the additional number of offenders sentenced to

life imprisonment without the possibility of release or parole. In the long-term, the Corrections

Department could potentially experience substantial increases in administrative responsibilities

as a result of a larger prison population.

According to AODA, there is a possibility that more capital cases would be pursued under provi-

sions of this bill since the ultimate penalty of death would be absent from the equation and

prosecutors in larger judicial districts may pursue true life sentences more often.

CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP

This bill conflicts with Senate Bill 173, which not only preserves the death penalty, but replaces

the current life sentence with a new punishment of life imprisonment without possibility of re-

lease or parole.

House Bill 576/aHJC -- Page 3

TECHNICAL ISSUES

The bill does not address or override application of the Geriatric Parole Act. According to the

Attorney General’s Office, persons sentenced under the provisions of this bill might be eligible

for parole under the provisions of that Act.

According to AODA, Section 31-20A-1 NMSA 1978 needs to be amended to clarify that defen-

dants are always able to present mitigating circumstances at sentencing. The section refers to the

enumerated aggravating circumstances for a capital crime, not aggravating circumstances pursu-

ant to Section 31-18-15.1 NMSA 1978.

ALTERNATIVES

The Attorney General’s Office recommends the following: “Legislators may want to consider

clarifying application or non-application of Geriatric Parole Act, NMSA 1978, § 31-21-25.1, to

inmates serving life without possibility of release or parole.”

And “Legislators may want to re-examine provisions of this bill that repeal NMSA 1978, §§ 31-

14-1 through 31-14-16, until such time as the two current death row inmates are executed, die

awaiting execution, have their sentences overturned or commuted.”

WHAT WILL BE THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ENACTING THIS BILL.

The sentence of death will continue to be a form of punishment for those convicted of a capital

felony.

DXM/njw:yr