A. Unless ordered by the court pursuant to the provisions of the Delinquency Act, a child taken into custody for an alleged delinquent act shall not be placed in detention unless a detention risk assessment instrument is completed and a determination is made that the child:
(1) poses a substantial risk of harm to himself;
(2) poses a substantial risk of harm to others; or
(3) has demonstrated that he may leave the jurisdiction of the court.
B. The criteria for detention in this section shall govern the decisions of all persons responsible for determining whether detention is appropriate prior to a detention hearing, based upon review of the detention risk assessment instrument.
C. The department shall develop and implement a detention risk assessment instrument. The department shall collect and analyze data regarding the application of the detention risk assessment instrument. On January 1, 2004, the department shall provide the legislature with a written report with respect to its collection and analysis of data regarding the application of the detention risk assessment instrument.
History: 1978 Comp., § 32A-2-11, enacted by Laws 1993, ch. 77, § 40; 2003, ch. 225, § 6.
ANNOTATIONSThe 2003 amendment, effective July 1, 2003, rewrote the section.
Detention at boys' school. — This statute does not preclude detention of a child at a boys' school pending an adjudicatory hearing on a delinquency petition; the purpose of the confinement determines whether a child is in detention or commitment at the school. State v. Anthony M., 1998-NMCA-065, 125 N.M. 149, 958 P.2d 107, cert. denied, 125 N.M. 145, 958 P.2d 103.
School resource officer did not place child in "detention". — Where plaintiff, a middle-school student who was diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, was arrested and charged with interference with members of staff, public officials or general public pursuant to § 30-20-13(D) NMSA 1978 after going to his regularly scheduled class when he was scheduled for an in-school suspension, and where plaintiff claimed that defendant, the school resource officer violated this section, which dictates that a child taken into custody for an alleged delinquent act shall not be placed in detention unless a detention risk assessment instrument is completed and certain determinations are made, plaintiff's claims failed as a matter of law because defendant placed plaintiff into custody and was not responsible for deciding whether plaintiff would be placed into detention. Defendant, acting within the scope of his duties could not have violated any of plaintiff's rights under the Children's Code regarding detention. Castaneda v. City of Albuquerque, 276 F.Supp.3d 1152 (D.N.M 2016).
Law reviews. — For survey, "Children's Court Practice in Delinquency and Need of Supervision Cases Under the New Rules," see 6 N.M.L. Rev. 331 (1976).
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — Authority of court to order juvenile delinquent incarcerated in adult penal institution, 95 A.L.R.3d 568.
Truancy as indicative of delinquency or incorrigibility, justifying commitment of infant or juvenile, 5 A.L.R.4th 1211.
Defense of infancy in juvenile delinquency proceedings, 83 A.L.R.4th 1135.