No brands of livestock except those recorded pursuant to the provisions of The Livestock Code [Chapter 77, Articles 2 to 18 NMSA 1978] and are peeled shall be recognized in law as evidence of ownership of the livestock upon which the brand is used unless the owner has other means of identification, including freeze brands and freeze mark identification, that is recognized as evidence of ownership for horses, mules or asses.

History: Laws 1895, ch. 6, § 2; C.L. 1897, § 107; Code 1915, § 118; C.S. 1929, § 4-1404; 1941 Comp., § 49-904; 1953 Comp., § 47-9-4; Laws 1975, ch. 50, § 1; 1985, ch. 60, § 2; 1999, ch. 282, § 49.

The 1999 amendment, effective July 1, 1999, substituted "The Livestock Code" for "this article", deleted "and fully healed" following "are peeled", and made stylistic changes throughout the section.

The 1985 amendment added "including freeze brands and freeze mark identification, which shall be recognized as evidence of ownership for horses, mules or asses."

Proof of recorded brand is sufficient to establish prima facie ownership of all animals bearing such brand. Gale & Farr v. Salas, 1901-NMSC-024, 11 N.M. 211, 66 P. 520; Chavez v. Territory, 1892-NMSC-014, 6 N.M. 455, 30 P. 903; Pryor v. Portsmouth Cattle Co., Ltd., 1891-NMSC-018, 6 N.M. 44, 27 P. 327.

It is only necessary to introduce certified copy of the recorded brand in evidence, where evidence of ownership depends upon the brand on the animal. State v. Analla, 1913-NMSC-073, 18 N.M. 294, 136 P. 600; Gale & Farr v. Salas, 1901-NMSC-024, 11 N.M. 211, 66 P. 520.

Proving ownership without recorded brand. — In a prosecution for larceny of livestock, testimony as to certain brands on the cattle, without proof that the brands have been recorded, was admissible to establish the identity of the cattle. State v. Curry, 1921-NMSC-047, 27 N.M. 205, 199 P. 367; State v. Crosby, 1917-NMSC-040, 23 N.M. 461, 169 P. 303; Territory v. Harrington, 1912-NMSC-006, 17 N.M. 62, 121 P. 613; Territory v. Valles, 1909-NMSC-026, 15 N.M. 228, 103 P. 984; Territory v. Meredith, 1907-NMSC-031, 14 N.M. 288, 91 P. 731; Gale & Farr v. Salas, 1901-NMSC-024, 11 N.M. 211, 66 P. 520.

Legal brand needed if sole proof. — Where a person depends solely upon a brand found upon an animal to establish title thereto, it must appear that he has a legal brand, and that fact must be established in the legal way. Territory v. Smith, 1904-NMSC-017, 12 N.M. 229, 78 P. 42.

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 4 Am. Jur. 2d Animals § 8 et seq.

3A C.J.S. Animals §§ 18 to 20.