Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance
committees of the Legislature. LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports if they
are used for other purposes.
F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T
SPONSOR Dixon/Borrego
LAST UPDATED
ORIGINAL DATE 2/28/25
SHORT TITLE Crime of Carrying a Gun While Trafficking
BILL
NUMBER House Bill 549
ANALYST Sanchez
ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT*
(dollars in thousands)
Agency/Program
FY25 FY26 FY27
3 Year
Total Cost
Recurring or
Nonrecurring
Fund
Affected
NMCD
No fiscal
impact
At least $28.2 At least $28.2 At least $56.4 Recurring General Fund
Cost to Counties
No fiscal
impact
At least $19.2 At least $19.2 At least $38.4 Recurring General Fund
LOPD
No fiscal
impact
At least $136.0 At least $136.0
At least
$272.0
Recurring General Fund
Total
No fiscal
impact
At least $183.4 At least $183.4
At least
$366.8
Recurring General Fund
Parentheses ( ) indicate expenditure decreases.
*Amounts reflect most recent analysis of this legislation.
Relates to House Bill 248
Sources of Information
LFC Files
Agency Analysis Received From
Administrative Office of the District Attorneys (AODA)
Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)
Law Office of the Public Defender (LOPD)
New Mexico Department of Justice (DOJ)
New Mexico Sentencing Commission (NMSC)
Department of Public Safety (DPS)
SUMMARY
Synopsis of House Bill 549
House Bill 549 (HB549) proposes to enact a new section within Section 30-7 NMSA 1978
(Weapons and Explosives), making it a third-degree felony to carry a firearm while violating
Section 30-31-20 NMSA 1978, which defines drug trafficking under the Controlled Substances
Act. The bill defines "firearm" as any weapon designed to expel a projectile by means of an
explosion, including its frame or receiver. Unlike existing firearm sentencing enhancement laws,
such as Section 31-18-16 NMSA 1978, which increase penalties for using, brandishing, or
discharging a firearm during a felony, HB549 establishes a separate offense based solely on
firearm possession during drug trafficking. The bill prescribes penalties consistent with Section
31-18-15 NMSA 1978, setting a maximum sentence of three years imprisonment and a fine of up House Bill 549 – Page 2
to $5,000.
The effective date of this bill is July 1, 2025.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
HB549 does not include a direct appropriation, but its enactment could increase costs for the
judiciary, prosecution, public defense, corrections, and law enforcement due to additional trials,
incarceration, and legal proceedings.
Incarceration drives costs in the criminal justice system, so any changes in the number of
individuals in prison and jail and the length of time served in prison and jail that might result
from this bill could have moderate fiscal impacts. The creation of any new crime, increase of
felony degree, or increase of sentencing penalties will likely increase the population of New
Mexico’s prisons and jails, consequently increasing long-term costs to state and county general
funds. In addition to the potential for new crimes to send more individuals to prison and jail,
longer sentences could result in fewer releases relative to admissions, driving up overall
populations.
The Corrections Department (NMCD) reports the average cost to incarcerate a single inmate in
FY24 was $59.3 thousand; however, due to the high fixed costs of the state’s prison facilities and
administrative overhead, LFC estimates a marginal cost (the cost per each additional inmate) of
$28.2 thousand per year across all facilities. LFC estimates a marginal cost (the cost per each
additional inmate) of $19.2 thousand per county jail inmate per year, based on incarceration costs
at the Metropolitan Detention Center. HB549 is anticipated to increase the number of
incarcerated individuals and increase the time they spend incarcerated. Additionally, individuals
convicted under HB549 may require intensive probation or parole supervision, adding further
costs to the NMCD’s Probation and Parole Division. Intensive supervision is time-consuming
and expensive, increasing workloads for probation officers.
The New Mexico Sentencing Commission (NMSC) notes that the bill may increase the state’s
prison population, as individuals convicted under HB549 could face longer incarceration periods
than those sentenced under existing firearm enhancement laws.
The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) anticipates that more severe penalties could lead
to an increase in jury trials, requiring additional judge time, courtroom staff, and jury-related
expenses. The Law Office of the Public Defender (LOPD) projects a rise in felony caseloads,
which may necessitate hiring additional trial attorneys. The estimated cost for an associate trial
attorney, including salary and benefits, is between $136 thousand and $145 thousand per year,
with additional operational costs. District attorneys’ offices may face similar workload increases
but have not provided specific cost estimates.
The Department of Public Safety (DPS) does not anticipate immediate fiscal impacts but
acknowledges that law enforcement agencies may require additional training to document
firearm possession in drug trafficking cases. While the exact financial impact remains difficult to
quantify, the bill is expected to require additional state funding for the courts, public defense, and
corrections system.
House Bill 549 – Page 3
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
HB549 raises questions regarding statutory overlap, prosecutorial discretion, and sentencing
consistency. Section 31-18-16 NMSA 1978 already provides firearm enhancements for felonies
involving firearms, increasing sentences by one, three, or five years depending on how the
firearm was used. HB549 does not clarify whether a defendant could face both a firearm
enhancement and a separate conviction under HB549 for the same conduct, which could lead to
double jeopardy concerns and sentencing inconsistencies.
The bill does not require that the firearm be brandished, discharged, or used in furtherance of
drug trafficking, meaning that mere possession of a firearm, even if legally owned, could result
in criminal liability. This differs from federal law under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), which requires a
firearm to be used or carried "in relation to" a drug trafficking offense. The lack of a requirement
for an intent or nexus between the firearm and the drug crime may raise constitutional or
evidentiary challenges in court.
The bill could also impact prosecutorial discretion, as it provides an alternative charging option
to existing firearm enhancements. This could lead to inconsistent application across judicial
districts, depending on whether prosecutors choose to charge individuals under HB549 or rely on
existing enhancement statutes.
PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS
HB549 could affect judicial efficiency, prosecutorial caseloads, public defense resources, and
corrections system capacity. The courts measure performance through case clearance rates and
time to disposition, both of which could be negatively impacted if felony trials increase due to
HB549. LOPD tracks caseload per attorney, which may increase if more cases go to trial.
NMCD monitors incarceration rates, probation supervision, and recidivism rates. The bill may
contribute to higher incarceration rates and longer prison sentences, which could require
additional funding for NMCD. The bill does not specify whether individuals convicted under
HB549 would be eligible for pre-prosecution diversion or alternative sentencing, which may
affect rehabilitation outcomes and recidivism rates.
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
The bill creates new administrative responsibilities for law enforcement, prosecutors, defense
attorneys, and the courts. DPS and local law enforcement agencies may need updated reporting
procedures and training for officers to properly document firearm possession in drug trafficking
cases. Prosecutors may require new case management guidelines to determine when to apply
HB549 versus existing firearm enhancements.
AOC would need to update jury instructions and case tracking systems. Corrections officials may
need to adjust intake processing and parole monitoring for individuals convicted under HB549.
CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP
HB549 relates to House Bill 248 – “Carrying a Firearm While Trafficking”. House Bill 549 – Page 4
TECHNICAL ISSUES
The bill does not define "carrying" a firearm, which may lead to interpretation challenges. Other
sections of New Mexico law, such as Section 30-7-1 NMSA 1978, define "carrying a deadly
weapon" as having it "on the person or in close proximity." Without a specific definition, courts
may rely on existing case law, potentially resulting in inconsistent applications of HB549.
The bill’s definition of "firearm" differs from the Uniform Jury Instruction (UJI) 14-704, which
also includes silencers and firearm mufflers. Aligning the bill’s definition with existing legal
standards may improve clarity.
The interaction between HB549 and existing firearm enhancements in Section 31-18-16 NMSA
1978 is unclear. If a person could be charged under both statutes for the same conduct, it may
raise double jeopardy concerns. Additionally, the bill does not specify whether it qualifies as a
predicate offense for habitual offender sentencing under Section 31-18-17 NMSA 1978, which
may lead to sentencing inconsistencies.
OTHER SUBSTANT IVE ISSUES
HB549 does not differentiate between legally owned and illegally possessed firearms, potentially
subjecting lawful gun owners to additional penalties. The bill also applies to all drug trafficking
offenses, regardless of drug quantity or intent, which could raise proportionality concerns in
sentencing.
The bill does not clarify how it interacts with federal firearm laws, such as 18 U.S.C. § 924(c),
which mandates longer federal sentences for firearm possession during drug trafficking. This
could lead to jurisdictional conflicts between state and federal prosecutors.
SS/hj/SL2