State v. Cleve
980 P.2d 23, 1999 NMSC 017, 127 N.M. 240 (1999)
Sections
Rule of Law:
New Mexico's cruelty-to-animals statute applies exclusively to domesticated animals and wild animals previously reduced to captivity, and is preempted by specific game and fish laws regarding the hunting of wild game.
Facts:
- The defendant, Charles Cleve, owned a one-hundred acre ranch near Elk, New Mexico, where he maintained a herd of cattle.
- Since the 1970s, Cleve experienced significant issues with deer entering his property and destroying crops and pastures, forcing him to reduce his cattle herd.
- For approximately twenty years, the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish attempted to alleviate the problem but eventually ceased efforts in 1995 without resolving the issue.
- Faced with the continued destruction of his property, Cleve began shooting at deer and setting snares to trap them.
- Cleve caught two deer in snares; a fawn died of strangulation, and a spike buck died of stress-related fatigue, starvation, or dehydration.
- These two specific snared deer formed the factual basis for the state's charges of cruelty to animals.
Procedural Posture:
- The State charged Cleve in the trial court with negligent use of a deadly weapon, unlawful hunting, and cruelty to animals.
- Cleve filed a motion to dismiss the cruelty charges, arguing the statute did not apply to game animals.
- The trial court denied the motion to dismiss.
- A jury found Cleve guilty of unlawful hunting and cruelty to animals.
- Cleve appealed his cruelty convictions to the New Mexico Court of Appeals.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions, holding that the cruelty statute applies to all animals.
- Cleve petitioned the Supreme Court of New Mexico for a writ of certiorari.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the New Mexico statute prohibiting cruelty to "any animal" extend to wild game animals, and do the state's comprehensive game and fish laws preempt the application of the cruelty statute to hunting activities?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Serna
No, the cruelty-to-animals statute does not apply to wild game animals, and yes, hunting laws preempt the cruelty statute. The Court employed statutory construction to interpret the phrase "any animal." Looking at the statute in context (in pari materia), other subsections regarding providing food, drink, and work fit for labor can only logically apply to domesticated animals. Furthermore, the legislative history, including the precedent of State v. Buford, indicates that the legislature intended to protect livestock and domesticated animals, not wild game. Additionally, the Court applied the General/Specific Statute Rule. The state's game and fish laws are comprehensive and specific regarding hunting methods. If the general cruelty statute applied to wild game, standard hunting practices (like snaring or shooting that doesn't instantly kill) could be prosecuted as cruelty, creating an irreconcilable conflict. Therefore, the specific game laws regarding hunting preempt the general cruelty statute.
Analysis:
This decision significantly narrows the scope of animal cruelty laws in New Mexico, establishing that wild animals are not protected under the general cruelty statute unless they have already been captured/domesticated. The ruling illustrates the judicial principle of deferring to legislative intent rather than adapting statutes to modern societal values regarding animal welfare. It also clarifies the 'General/Specific Statute Rule' in New Mexico criminal law, emphasizing that when a specific regulatory scheme (like hunting laws) conflicts with a general criminal prohibition, the specific scheme controls to prevent absurd results where lawful activities (hunting) would technically violate general criminal laws.
Gunnerbot
AI-powered case assistant
Loaded: State v. Cleve (1999)
Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"