N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-31-7
A. The following controlled substances are included in Schedule II:
(1) any of the following substances, except those narcotic drugs listed in other schedules, whether produced directly or indirectly by extraction from substances of vegetable origin, or independently by means of chemical synthesis, or by combination of extraction and chemical synthesis:
(2) any of the following opiates, including their isomers, esters, ethers, salts and salts of isomers, whenever the existence of these isomers, esters, ethers and salts is possible within the specific chemical designation:
(3) unless listed in another schedule, any material, compound, mixture or preparation that contains any quantity of the following substances having a potential for abuse associated with a stimulant effect on the central nervous system:
History: 1953 Comp., § 54-11-7, enacted by Laws 1972, ch. 84, § 7; 1978, ch. 22, § 9; 1979, ch. 112, § 1; 2005, ch. 280, § 3; 2007, ch. 210, § 9; 2021 (1st S.S.), ch. 4, § 65.
The 2021 (1st S.S.) amendment, effective June 29, 2021, removed marijuana, tetrahydrocannabinols and chemical derivatives of tetrahydrocannabinols from the list of Schedule II controlled substances; and in Subsection A, deleted Subparagraphs A(1)(e) and A(1)(f).
The 2007 amendment, effective July 1, 2007, included in Schedule II marijuana, tetrahydrocannabinols and its derivatives that are used by qualified patients pursuant to the Lynn and Erin Compassionate Use Act.
The 2005 amendment, effective June 17, 2005, added Subsection A(4) to provide that the board may by rule add controlled substances to Schedule II; deleted the former provision in Subsection B that a drug abuse rehabilitation program was defined in Section 26-2-13A(3) NMSA 1978.
Morphine. — Although the word "morphine" does not appear in the schedules in this act, the trial court could properly take judicial notice that morphine is an opium derivative under this section. State v. Yanez, 1976-NMCA-073, 89 N.M. 397, 553 P.2d 252.
Percodan. — Percodan is a Schedule II controlled substance. State v. Sanchez, 1979-NMCA-133, 93 N.M. 596, 603 P.2d 335.
Cocaine may be classified as narcotic. — The legislature can rationally classify cocaine, a nonnarcotic central nervous system stimulant, as a narcotic for penalty and regulatory purposes because of the similarity between cocaine and narcotic drugs in terms of cocaine's potential for societal harm. Chouinard v. State, 1980-NMCA-168, 96 N.M. 783, 635 P.2d 986, rev'd on other grounds, 1981-NMSC-096, 96 N.M. 658, 634 P.2d 680, cert. denied, 456 U.S. 930, 102 S. Ct. 1980, 72 L. Ed. 2d 447 (1982).
Proof of abusive quantity of amphetamine not required. — The state need not prove that an amphetamine alleged to have been sold by the defendant was of a sufficient quantity to have a potential for abuse associated with a stimulant effect, since, in Subsection A(3), the statutory words "having a potential for abuse" modify "substances," not "any quantity." State v. Hernandez, 1986-NMCA-017, 104 N.M. 97, 717 P.2d 73, cert. denied, 103 N.M. 798, 715 P.2d 71; State v. Martinez, 1986-NMCA-069, 104 N.M. 584, 725 P.2d 263.
Identification of cocaine by expert. — Expert testimony is not required to establish that a witness sold cocaine to a defendant. State v. Rubio, 1990-NMCA-090, 110 N.M. 605, 798 P.2d 206.