1. A. The following conduct is lawful for a person who is twenty-one years of age or older and shall not constitute grounds for detention, search or arrest of a person or search of property, and cannabis products that relate to the conduct are not contraband or subject to seizure or forfeiture pursuant to the Controlled Substances Act [Chapter 30, Article 31 NMSA 1978] or the Forfeiture Act [Chapter 31, Article 27 NMSA 1978]:

   1. (1) possessing, using, being under the influence of, displaying, purchasing, obtaining or transporting not more cannabis than authorized by the Cannabis Regulation Act or the medical cannabis program;
   2. (2) possessing in excess of two ounces of cannabis, sixteen grams of cannabis extract and eight hundred milligrams of edible cannabis if the excess is stored in the person's private residence and not visible from a public place;
   3. (3) transferring, without financial consideration, to a person who is twenty-one years of age or older not more than the amount of cannabis lawfully purchased and obtained pursuant to the Cannabis Regulation Act or the medical cannabis program;
   4. (4) ingesting or otherwise consuming cannabis or cannabis products purchased and obtained pursuant to the Cannabis Regulation Act or the medical cannabis program;
   5. (5) possessing, using, displaying, purchasing, obtaining or manufacturing cannabis extract using nonvolatile solvents, alcohol or carbon dioxide or no solvents;
   6. (6) manufacturing, transporting or giving away to a person twenty-one years of age or older cannabis paraphernalia;
   7. (7) assisting another person who is twenty-one years of age or older in, or allowing property to be used in, any of the acts described in Paragraphs (1) through (6) of this subsection;
   8. (8) smoking cannabis or cannabis products in an area authorized pursuant to the Cannabis Regulation Act or a local jurisdiction;
   9. (9) possessing, planting, cultivating, harvesting, drying, manufacturing cannabis products using nonvolatile solvents, alcohol or carbon dioxide or no solvents or transporting not more than six mature cannabis plants and six immature cannabis plants per person; provided that despite a household having multiple residents, no more than twelve mature cannabis plants may be present in one household; and provided further that if the person does not exceed the maximum number of cannabis plants, the person may possess the cannabis produced by the cannabis plants notwithstanding any weight limits; and
   10. (10) transporting homegrown cannabis or mature or immature cannabis plants when the person is moving the person's residence to another location or for purposes of testing or manufacturing.
2. B. Paragraph (6) of Subsection A of this section is intended to meet the requirements of 21 U.S.C. Section 863(f) by authorizing under state law any person in compliance with this section to manufacture, possess or distribute cannabis paraphernalia.

3. C. None of the following shall, individually or in combination with each other, constitute reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime and is not a basis to stop, detain or search a person:

   1. (1) the odor of cannabis or cannabis extract or of burnt cannabis or cannabis extract;
   2. (2) the possession of or the suspicion of possession of cannabis without evidence of quantity in excess of two ounces of cannabis, sixteen grams of cannabis extract or eight hundred milligrams of edible cannabis; or
   3. (3) the possession of multiple containers of cannabis without evidence of quantity in excess of two ounces of cannabis, sixteen grams of cannabis extract or eight hundred milligrams of edible cannabis.
4. D. Paragraph (1) of Subsection A and Subsection C of this section shall not apply when a law enforcement officer is investigating whether a person is operating a vehicle or watercraft while intoxicated or under the influence of or impaired by alcohol or a drug or any combination thereof in violation of Section 66-8-102 or 66-13-3 NMSA 1978.

History: Laws 2021 (1st S.S.), ch. 4, § 25.

ANNOTATIONS

Effective dates. — Laws 2021 (1st S.S.), ch. 4 contained no effective date provision, but, pursuant to N.M. Const., art. IV, § 23, was effective June 29, 2021, 90 days after adjournment of the legislature.

Rule, that the smell of marijuana alone can satisfy the probable cause requirement for a warrantless search of a vehicle, applied in a post-decriminalization, pre-legalization setting. — Where a police officer lawfully stopped a truck driven by defendant after observing defendant commit a series of traffic offenses, and where, upon approaching the driver's side window, the officer detected a strong odor of marijuana emanating from the vehicle, the probable cause requirement for a warrantless search was satisfied, because the odor of marijuana in defendant's vehicle was inherently incriminating, and possession of marijuana during the post-decriminalization, pre-legalization period, in any quantity was illegal. State v. Perry, 2025-NMSC-043.

The smell of marijuana alone can satisfy the probable cause requirement for a warrantless search in the post-decriminalization, pre-legalization setting. — The smell of marijuana alone can satisfy the probable cause requirement for a warrantless search in the post-decriminalization, pre-legalization setting under Article II, Section 10 of the New Mexico constitution. State v. Perry, 2026-NMCA-032, cert. denied.

Where a police officer stopped defendant’s truck after observing defendant commit a series of traffic offenses, and where, upon approaching the vehicle, the officer detected a strong odor of marijuana emanating from the vehicle, and where the officer, after receiving consent to search the vehicle, found drugs and drug paraphernalia, and where defendant moved to suppress the evidence, claiming that the officer did not have probable cause to obtain a search warrant because the smell of marijuana could not support a finding of probable cause when possession of less than one-half ounce of marijuana was a penalty assessment rather than a criminal offense, the district court did not err in denying defendant’s motion to suppress, because the officer’s assertion that she would obtain a search warrant if defendant did not let the officer search defendant’s truck was supported by actual probable cause based on the smell of marijuana, and therefore, because the officer had probable cause, defendant’s subsequent consent was sufficient to satisfy a warrantless search of the vehicle. State v. Perry, 2026-NMCA-032, cert. denied.