A. In any election contest a prima facie showing that the precinct board [election board] of any precinct has failed to substantially comply with the provisions of the Election Code [Chapter 1 NMSA 1978] that protect the secrecy and sanctity of the ballot and prescribe duties of the precinct board [election board] during the conduct of election, shall cast upon the candidates of the political party having majority representation on the precinct board [election board] the burden of proving that no fraud, intimidation, coercion or undue influence was exerted by such members of the precinct board [election board], and that the secrecy and purity of the ballot was safeguarded and no intentional evasion of the substantial requirements of the law was made. B. Upon failure to make such a showing upon which the court shall so find, the votes of that entire precinct shall be rejected; provided, that no such rejection shall be made where it appears to the court that the members of the precinct board [election board] ignored the requirements of the Election Code with the probable interest of procuring the rejection of the entire vote in the precinct. History: 1953 Comp., § 3-14-17, enacted by Laws 1969, ch. 240, § 342. Bracketed material. — The bracketed material was inserted by the compiler and is not part of the law. Laws 2019, ch. 212, § 283, effective April 3, 2019, provided that references in the Election Code to "precinct board", shall be deemed to be references to "election board", as that term is defined in Section 1-1-13 NMSA 1978. Cross references. — For constitutional provision as to securing the secrecy of the ballot and purity of election, see N.M. Const., art. VII, § 1. Ballot errors by county clerks. — Although the statute applied to precinct boards, where the county clerk omitted a candidate's name from the ballot, and there was no fraud, the court drew an analogy from this section to order the entire vote of the affected precinct rejected. Gunaji v. Macias , 2001-NMSC-028, 130 N.M. 734, 31 P.3d 1008. Constitutional amendment election. — There are no lawful grounds for a recount in New Mexico of a constitutional amendment election. 2004 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 04-01. Law reviews. — For note, "Why Gunaji v. Macias Matters to Candidates and Voters: Its Impact on New Mexico Election Law", see 33 N.M.L. Rev. 431 (2003). Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 26 Am. Jur. 2d Elections §§ 328, 417. 29 C.J.S. Elections §§ 201(2), 249.
‹ Prev All New Mexico sections Next ›
Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Statute text is provided for general information and may not reflect the most recent amendments; verify against the official state code.