SB40 makes several changes to New Mexico law governing driving on a revoked license and ignition interlock requirements. The bill requires a person convicted of driving on a revoked license to obtain an ignition interlock device and an ignition interlock license within 10 days of conviction, replacing the prior approach that included vehicle immobilization for some offenders. It also makes driving on a revoked license a case of record in metropolitan court, aligning it with DUI and domestic violence cases for appeal purposes.
The bill further revises ignition interlock licensing rules. It allows ignition interlock licenses to be valid for four or eight years, and it permits an ignition interlock device to be removed by a bureau-approved installer without a court order at the applicant’s request. SB40 also updates the interlock device fund provisions by expanding the amounts available for installation, removal, and monthly usage costs for indigent participants, while keeping the fund dedicated to helping eligible low-income offenders comply with interlock requirements.
Impact
SB40 amends Sections 34-8A-6, 66-5-39.1, 66-5-503, and 66-8-102.3 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated. Its main legal effect is to strengthen and standardize ignition interlock compliance for people convicted of driving on a revoked license, while removing the prior immobilization-device language and the related one-year license delay provision. It also expands administrative flexibility for interlock removal and increases the potential duration of ignition interlock licenses, and it adjusts interlock fund eligibility and payment caps to better support indigent drivers required to use interlock devices.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the supplied materials. Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears to be framed as a public-safety and compliance bill, with a focus on ensuring that drivers whose licenses are revoked—especially those revoked for DUI-related reasons—use ignition interlock devices before returning to driving. The absence of recorded votes or discussion prevents a more specific assessment of legislative sentiment.
Contention
The most likely points of contention are the bill’s mandatory interlock requirement for all convictions under the revoked-license statute, the short 10-day compliance window, and the expansion of interlock-related obligations for affected drivers. Another possible issue is the shift away from immobilization toward interlock installation, which may be viewed as either a more practical alternative or as an added burden depending on perspective. The bill also changes the interlock fund’s payment levels and indigency criteria, which could raise questions about cost, administrative capacity, and whether the fund will adequately cover low-income participants.