AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves the New Mexico Construction Industries and Manufactured Housing Division (the Division) seeking to inspect Rabbi Y’Hoshua Cohen's property for code violations. Cohen, who also resided on the property, allegedly rented out parts of it as "apartments" without obtaining the necessary construction permits. The Division's interest in inspecting the property was sparked by complaints regarding unsafe conditions and unauthorized construction (paras 2-4).

Procedural History

• First Judicial District Court: Granted the Division's motion to quash Cohen's petition for a writ of mandamus, dismissing the case with prejudice and affirming the Division's statutory authority to conduct an inspection (para 4).
• Twelfth Judicial District Court: Filed by the Division seeking a court order to enforce its administrative order for entry to inspect Cohen's property for violations. The court issued a "Trial Order" directing the Division to inspect the property within twenty days (para 5).

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellee (The Division): Argued that it had the statutory right to enter Cohen's property to inspect for violations based on written complaints about unsafe conditions and unauthorized construction. Asserted that a court order, rather than a search warrant, was sufficient for the inspection (paras 5-6, 9).
• Respondent-Appellant (Cohen): Contended that the Division's order and the subsequent district court's order violated his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures, arguing that an administrative search warrant based on probable cause was required for the inspection (para 6).

Legal Issues

• Whether the Division can enforce its administrative order to inspect Cohen's property without an administrative search warrant, and if such enforcement violates the Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures (para 8).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals reversed the district court's order and remanded the case with instructions to determine whether probable cause exists to support the issuance of an administrative search warrant (para 33).

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, led by Chief Judge M. Monica Zamora, found that the Fourth Amendment requires an administrative search warrant supported by probable cause for the Division to conduct the inspection. The court distinguished between statutory authority and constitutional requirements, emphasizing that adherence to statutory procedures does not negate the need for a warrant under the Fourth Amendment. The court rejected the Division's arguments that the inspection fell into exceptions for warrantless searches, such as those applicable to pervasively regulated businesses or situations involving consent or exigent circumstances. The court concluded that the district court erred by not making a determination of probable cause for the issuance of an administrative search warrant (paras 10-21, 33).