STATE V. LYNCH, 1971-NMCA-049, 82 N.M.
532, 484 P.2d 374 (Ct. App. 1971)
STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Appellee
vs.
JOE LYNCH, Defendant-Appellant
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO
1971-NMCA-049, 82 N.M. 532, 484 P.2d 374
Appeal from the District Court of Sant
Fe County, Scarborough, Judge
JAMES A. MALONEY, Attorney General, JOHN
A. DARDEN, Asst. Attorney General, Santa Fe, New Mexico, Attorneys for
Appellee.
MARY C. WALTERS, TOULOUSE, MOORE &
WALTERS, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorney for Appellant.
HENDLEY, Judge, wrote the opinion.
Waldo Spiess, C.J., Joe W. Wood, J.
{1} Defendant was convicted
in Magistrate Court of the crime of injury to animals. Section 40A-18-2,
N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl. Vol. 1964). The conviction was appealed de novo to the
District Court and affirmed. Defendant's appeal presents four points for
reversal. The issue of jurisdiction is dispositive of the appeal.
Magistrate Court Jurisdiction.
{3} The jurisdiction of
magistrate courts in criminal matters is limited to "* * * case of
misdemeanors where the punishment prescribed by law is a fine of one hundred
dollars ($100) or less, or imprisonment for six [6] months or less, or where
fine or imprisonment or both are prescribed but neither exceeds these
maximums." Section 36-3-4, N.M.S.A. 1953, (Repl. Vol. 1964, Supp. 1969).
{4} The penalty for the
violation of the statute under which defendant was convicted is prescribed by §
40A-29-4 subd. A, N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl. Vol. 1964), imprisonment "* * * in
the county jail for a definite term less than one [1] year, or to the payment
of a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or to both such
imprisonment and fine in the discretion of the judge." The Magistrate
Court could proceed as provided in § 36-3-4(B), supra, but it was without
jurisdiction to try defendant.
{5} Since the Magistrate
Court was without subject-matter jurisdiction, there
{*533}
is no possibility of waiver or consent to jurisdiction. State ex rel.
Overton v. New Mexico State Tax Commission,
81 N.M. 28,
462 P.2d 613 (1970).
Thus, the magistrate proceedings were void and defendant's conviction therein a
nullity.
District Court Jurisdiction.
{6} Section 36-15-3 subd. A,
N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl. Vol. 1964, Supp. 1969) states:
"Appeals from the magistrate court shall be determined
by trial de novo in the district court, and all laws, rules and regulation
governing the magistrate court shall govern the trial in the district
court." (Emphasis added).
{7} Thus, on appeals from a
magistrate court, the district court becomes a court of limited jurisdiction
for the purpose of the appeal and the trial de novo. See Sanchez v. Reilly,
54
N.M. 264,
221 P.2d 560 (1950); Pointer v. Lewis,
25 N.M. 260,
181 P. 428
(1919); Barruel v. Irwin, 2 N.M.(Gild.) 223 (1882); City of Albuquerque v.
Sanchez,
81 N.M. 272,
466 P.2d 118 (Ct. App. 1970). If the magistrate court
lacked jurisdiction the district court suffered the same lack of jurisdiction.
Geren & Hammond v. Lawson,
25 N.M. 415,
184 P. 216 (1919); Pointer v.
Lewis, supra; Chaves v. Perea, 3 N.M.(Gild.) 89,
2 P. 73 (1884).
{8} Reversed and remanded
with directions to set aside the conviction, judgment and sentence.
Waldo Spiess, C.J., Joe W. Wood, J.