defense and/or indemnification for claims involving the conduct of law enforcement officers. Officer Gutierrez concedes that he is not a “law enforcement officer” within the meaning' of the TCA; however, he argues that he fits within another of the enumerated definitions of “public employee.” For the reasons that follow, while we agree that Officer Gutierrez is not a “law enforcement officer” within the meaning and definitions of the TCA, we disagree that he meets any alternate definition of a “public employee.” Officer Gutierrez Is Not a “Law Enforcement Officer” of a “Governmental Entity .M. 47, 897 P.2d 234 (concluding that district attorneys and staff were not “law enforcement officers’’); Dunn v. State ex rel. Taxation & Revenue Dep't, 1993-NMCA-059, ¶ 11, 116 N.M. 1, 859 P.2d 469 (<HOLDING>). {12} Here, Officer Gutierrez agrees that he
holding that the decisions of administrative agencies of the state described by article vi section 29 of the constitution of new mexico include regulations adopted by a board emphasis added internal quotation marks and citations omitted holding that the state has a compelling interest in protecting the citizens of minnesota from those who pose a severe threat to their health and safety citation omitted internal quotation marks omitted holding the deprivation of the inmates property interest in his mail is not a cognizable constitutional injury given the availability of adequate state postdeprivation remedies under new york law internal quotation marks omitted recognizing that the nsa qualifies as a withholding statute under exemption 3 because it refers to particular types of matters that are to be withheld internal quotation marks and citations omitted holding that the director of the new mexico m otor v ehicle department who has statutory authority to make arrests was not a law enforcement officer because the vast majority of his time and effort are involved in administrative matters internal quotation marks omitted