A. Making a bomb scare consists of falsely and maliciously stating to another person that a bomb or other explosive has been placed in such a position that property or persons are likely to be injured or destroyed.
B. Whoever commits making a bomb scare is guilty of a fourth degree felony.
C. A court may order a person convicted for the offense of making a bomb scare to reimburse the victim of the offense for economic harm caused by that offense.
D. As used in this section, "economic harm" means all direct, incidental and consequential financial harm suffered by a victim of the offense of making a bomb scare. "Economic harm" includes:
(1) wages, salaries or other compensation lost as a result of the commission of the offense of making a bomb scare;
(2) the cost of all wages, salaries or other compensation paid to employees for time that those employees are prevented from working as a result of the commission of the offense of making a bomb scare; and
(3) overhead costs incurred for the period of time that a business is shut down as a result of the commission of the offense of making a bomb scare.
E. This section shall not be construed to limit a court's authority to order restitution to a victim of the offense of making a bomb scare pursuant to other provisions of law.
History: 1953 Comp., § 40A-20-13, enacted by Laws 1975, ch. 285, § 1; 1981, ch. 15, § 1; 2003, ch. 35, § 1.
ANNOTATIONSThe 2003 amendment, effective July 1, 2003, designated the former first and second paragraphs as Subsections A and B; added Subsections C, D and E; and substituted "commits making" for "makes" following "Whoever" at the beginning of Subsection B.
Restitution. — Although the trial court may request that an inquiry into defendant's ability to pay be made by a probation officer, it is mandatory that the actual determination of defendant's ability to pay be made by the court. Trial court may not delegate to probation officer determination of defendant's ability to pay obligations imposed by court. Amount of restitution and time of payment must be set by court and not be left to discretion of probation authorities. State v. Carrasco, 1997-NMCA-123, 124 N.M. 320, 950 P.2d 293
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — Validity and construction of terroristic threat statutes, 45 A.L.R.4th 949.
Imposition of state or local penalties for threatening to use explosive devices at schools or other buildings, 79 A.L.R.5th 1.
Validity, construction, and application of 18 U.S.C.A. § 844(e), prohibiting use of mail, telephone, telegraph, or other instrument of commerce to convey bomb threat, 160 A.L.R. Fed. 625.