As used in the Uniform Child-Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act:
(1) "abandoned" means left without provision for reasonable and necessary care or supervision;
(2) "child" means an individual who has not attained eighteen years of age;
(3) "child-custody determination" means a judgment, decree or other order of a court providing for legal custody, physical custody or visitation with respect to a child. The term includes a permanent, temporary, initial or modification order. The term does not include an order relating to child support or other monetary obligation of an individual;
(4) "child-custody proceeding" means a proceeding in which legal custody, physical custody or visitation with respect to a child is an issue. The term includes a proceeding for dissolution of marriage, custody of a child when dissolution of a marriage is not an issue, neglect, abuse, dependency, guardianship, paternity, termination of parental rights whether filed alone or with an adoption proceeding and protection from domestic violence in which the issue may appear. The term does not include a proceeding involving juvenile delinquency, contractual emancipation or enforcement under Article 3 of the Uniform Child-Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act;
(5) "commencement" means the filing of the first pleading in a proceeding;
(6) "court" means an entity authorized under the law of a state to establish, enforce or modify a child-custody determination;
(7) "home state" means the state in which a child lived with a parent or a person acting as a parent for at least six consecutive months immediately before the commencement of a child-custody proceeding. In the case of a child less than six months of age, the term means the state in which the child lived from birth with any of the persons mentioned. A period of temporary absence of any of the mentioned persons is part of the period;
(8) "initial determination" means the first child-custody determination concerning a particular child;
(9) "issuing court" means the court that makes a child-custody determination for which enforcement is sought under the Uniform Child-Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act;
(10) "issuing state" means the state in which a child-custody determination is made;
(11) "modification" means a child-custody determination that changes, replaces, supersedes or is otherwise made after a previous determination concerning the same child, whether or not it is made by the court that made the previous determination;
(12) "person" means an individual, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, limited liability company, association, joint venture, government, governmental subdivision, agency or instrumentality, public corporation or any other legal or commercial entity;
(13) "person acting as a parent" means a person, other than a parent, who:
(A) has physical custody of the child or has had physical custody for a period of six consecutive months, including any temporary absence, within one year immediately before the commencement of a child-custody proceeding; and
(B) has been awarded legal custody by a court or claims a right to legal custody under the law of this state;
(14) "physical custody" means the physical care and supervision of a child;
(15) "state" means a state of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands or any territory or insular possession subject to the jurisdiction of the United States;
(16) "tribe" means an Indian tribe or band, or Alaskan Native village, which is recognized by federal law or formally acknowledged by a state; and
(17) "warrant" means an order issued by a court authorizing law enforcement officers to take physical custody of a child.
History: Laws 2001, ch. 114, § 102.
ANNOTATIONSNon-Indian-owned land within the exterior boundaries of a Pueblo. — In a divorce and custody dispute, where the mother was a non-Indian; the father was an enrolled member of the tribe; the couple's children were enrolled members of the tribe; the couple spent most of their four years of married life on the tribal lands; the mother took the children to her father's house on non-Indian-owned fee land within the exterior boundaries of the tribal lands, the fee land was not tribal territory for purposes of determining the home state of the children. Garcia v. Gutierrez, 2009-NMSC-044, 147 N.M. 105, 217 P.3d 591, rev'g 2008-NMCA-116, 144 N.M. 761, 192 P.3d 275.
Home state. — Land owned in fee by a non-Indian within the exterior boundaries of a pueblo is part of the tribe for purposes of determining the home state of a child. Garcia v. Gutierrez, 2008-NMCA-116, 144 N.M. 761, 192 P.3d 275, rev'd, 2009-NMSC-044, 147 N.M. 105, 217 P.3d 591.
Home state. — Where the child continuously lived in New Mexico with the child's parent from birth until the child was four months of age when the parent and the child moved to Texas; the child and the parent lived in Texas for less than two weeks when the parent returned to New Mexico and filed a child custody proceeding; the child was on New Mexico medicaid; and the child's physician was in New Mexico, New Mexico was the child's home state and the New Mexico court had jurisdiction even though the Texas parent had filed a custody proceeding in Texas before the New Mexico proceeding was filed. Malissa v. Matthew Wayne H., 2008-NMCA-128, 145 N.M. 22, 193 P.3d 569.
"Home state". — As defined in this section and used in 40-10-4A NMSA 1978 (now see 40-10A-201 NMSA 1978), "home state" means the state in which the child resided for six consecutive months immediately preceding the commencement of the current, not original, proceedings. Trask v. Trask, 1986-NMCA-098, 104 N.M. 780, 727 P.2d 88.
"Modification decree". — The father's Petition to Establish Child Custody and Visitation, alleging that a California decree was void and not entitled to full faith and credit, constituted a "modification decree" as defined in this section, even though the father did not specifically use the term "modification." Nelson v. Nelson, 1996-NMCA-015, 121 N.M. 243, 910 P.2d 319.
Construed with 32-1-54 NMSA 1978. — That the nonparent custodians of a child were "acting as parents" pursuant to 40-10-3H NMSA 1978 (now see Subsection (13) of this section) because they had physical custody of the child and claimed a right to custody did not have applicability in a neglect or abuse case so as to entitle the custodians to the protections afforded in a termination of parent rights case. In re Agnes P., 1990-NMCA-091, 110 N.M. 768, 800 P.2d 202 (decided under prior law, see Section 32A-4-27).
Law reviews. — Annual Survey of New Mexico Family Law, see 17 N.M.L. Rev. 291 (1987).
For note, "Domestic Relations - An Interpretation of the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act and the New Mexico Child Custody Jurisdiction Act; State ex rel. Dept. of Human Servs. v. Avinger," see 17 N.M.L. Rev. 409 (1987).
For annual survey of domestic relations law in New Mexico, see 18 N.M.L. Rev. 371 (1988).