However, during cross-examination, defense counsel questioned Detective Shawn about Ortega's alleged statement to Landaras, specifically attacking his failure to follow-up on this information known by one of his detectives, Detective Martinez. {61} Defendant next asserts that the multiple conspiracy charges and convictions violate the Double Jeopardy Clause where there was no evidence of any agreement, let alone separate agreements to support separate charges. Second, the statement was more probative of the identity of the shooters than any other evidence the State could procure through reasonable efforts-in Ortiz's taped statement he indicated that there was a big guy wearing black jeans and a black t-shirt, presumably Allison, and a little guy wearing light blue jeans and a striped shirt, presumably Defendant, on the balcony and that the little guy did the shooting. Invalid memorial . Thus, even assuming the prosecutor improperly led the witness in the excerpts identified by Defendant, we find no prejudice to Defendant on the issue of identification. I conclude that Rule 11-803(X) does not provide a basis for admitting the statement. Detective Shawn testified that Ortiz identified Defendant from a photo lineup as one of the shooters, but refused to have his response recorded on tape. Her desire to . Memorial ID. Finally, the general purposes of these rules and the interests of justice will best be served by the admission of Ortiz's taped statement into evidence, as the circumstances surrounding the statement indicate trustworthiness equivalent to evidence admitted under the other hearsay exceptions. . In this case the person in the best position to gauge the candor of the out of court statement was Detective Shawn, who alone observed Ortiz's demeanor at the time of the interview. The State initially proffered the out of court statements under Rule 11-803(E) NMRA 2002. Chris Trujillo, CxA Construction | Commissioning Specialist at QA Engineering LLC Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States 291 followers 294 connections Join to connect QA Engineering LLC. Trujillo Family Funeral Home LLC in Albuquerque, NM | Company Info Company Information Sponsored Links Company Contacts CHRISTOPHER TRUJILLO Member JOHN LOPEZ Member WILLIAM FERGUSON Manager WILLIAM FERGUSON Member WILLIAM FERGUSON Organizer Reviews Write Review There are no reviews yet for this company. In this case Ortiz described seeing a big guy and a little guy. He also described what each was wearing and told how the big guy asked for the gun, but the little guy did not want to give it to him. {63} Defendant argues that cumulative error requires a reversal in this case. {86} In this case, the State was faced with an out-of-court statement that was almost, but not quite, a recorded recollection under 11-803(E), and was almost, but not quite, a statement of identification under Rule 11-801(D)(1)(c). Ward v. Romero, 17 N.M. 88, 100, 125 P. 617, 621 (1912)). Do you know how many shots Charlie fired? She was born to Santiago Miranda and Magdalena Sanchez on February 25, 1928, in Albuquerque, New Mexico. {72} I would, however, remand for a new trial because I believe for the following reasons that the admission of the tape and transcript of Joseph Ortiz's interview with the police was reversible error. We do not address this argument since we have reversed Defendant's convictions as to all charges relating to shooting at a dwelling or occupied building. See State v. Deaton, 74 N.M. 87, 90, 390 P.2d 966, 968 (1964). The State also offered the hearsay under a number of other rules: Rule 11-613(B) (extrinsic proof of prior inconsistent statements), Rule 11-801(D)(1)(c) (statements of identification), Rule 11-804(A)(3) (one of the definitions of unavailable) and Rule 11-803(X). . Because causation was at issue here, the jury was also instructed that: The cause of death is an act which, in a natural and continuous chain of events, produces the death and without which the death would not have occurred. He is a Taos High School graduate of (1998). Any danger inherent in a true identification of a gang member, however, would also seem to argue against the candor of such a statement, especially to the police. VI, 2. 27. 2052. We agree with the Court in State v. Ortiz-Burciaga, 1999-NMCA-146, 22, 128 N.M. 382, 993 P.2d 96, however, that under a substantial evidence review, [i]t is the exclusive province of the jury to resolve factual inconsistencies in testimony. We will not reweigh the evidence or substitute our judgment for that of the jury. {11} Defendant's first argument is that the trial court erred by admitting the tape and transcript of Ortiz's out-of-court statements. The little guy then yelled at the four below, You guys think I'm joking, before shooting. See id. See e.g., Gonzales, 113 N.M. at 230, 824 P.2d at 1032 (finding that in order to prevail on his ineffective assistance of counsel claim, defendant had to first demonstrate that had his counsel moved for severance, the motion would have been granted). He claims that the testimony came out during defense counsel's examination of Detective Shawn, during which defense counsel asked Shawn an open-ended question about one of his interviews. I agree that Ortiz's fear of retaliation shows that he has valid reasons for being less than candid about his cousin's and Defendant's involvement in the shooting at trial. Majority Opinion, 58. Title: Microsoft Word - 2023-01-25 SJ County H2 Fact Sheet - FINAL.docx Author: Chris Created Date: 1/25/2023 9:37:23 AM . Chris received a Bachelor of Arts degree from New Mexico Highlands University. Defendant asserts that an unconstitutional sentence is an illegal sentence that may be challenged for the first time on appeal, relying on State v. Sinyard, 100 N.M. 694, 695, 675 P.2d 426, 427 (Ct.App.1983) and State v. Smith, 102 N.M. 350, 351-353, 695 P.2d 834, 835-837. We find there was sufficient evidence to convict Defendant of first-degree depraved-mind murder on either of these theories. From the onset of New Mexico jurisprudence, first-degree murder convictions have been appealed directly to this Court, and even after the creation of the Court of Appeals, this Court retained this crucial area of jurisdiction. (3)the general purposes of these rules and the interests of justice will best be served by admission of the statement into evidence. He was a 1959 graduate of Valley High School (ABQ) and attended one year at UNM. In this situation the use of Rule 11-803(X) seems contrary to its purpose, and allows the State to avoid the requirements of the hearsay rule and its normal exceptions. The email address cannot be subscribed. Inmates personal profiles, inmates legal profiles and inmate resumes. I concur in parts II, III(A), IV, V, VI, VIII, IX and XI. Rather, relying on State v. Hernandez, 117 N.M. 497, 873 P.2d 243 (1994), Defendant argues that the State failed to prove that his actions caused Mendez's death, therefore failing to meet its burden as to the causation requirement. Now, who was Charlie shooting at, if you know? This narrow interpretation of the rule has been rejected by a majority of circuits, and we decline to adopt it in our jurisdiction. She was driving a purple 2005 Chevrolet Cavalier with New Mexico plate number JFZ-534. Defense counsel told the court that he was not aware that Ortega and Canas had been arrested on material witness warrants until some time after the two had been arrested, but that he and the prosecutor did conduct an interview with Ortega which eventually broke down due to animosity between the lawyers. {46} Finally, Defendant argues that defense counsel's failure to challenge the indictment for conspiracy to commit depraved-mind murder, a non-existent crime, constituted per se ineffectiveness. Public Records & Background Search Christopher David Trujillo, age 60, Denver, CO Background Check The statement was thus specifically covered by [some] of the foregoing exceptions Rule 11-803(X). This rule expressly requires that the proffered statement have equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness. I believe that Ortiz had a motive to lie and therefore his statement lacked circumstantial guarantees and was inherently untrustworthy. Defense counsel, in a motion to dismiss for prosecutorial misconduct, alleged two instances in which the State failed to provide material evidence to the defense. Defendant asserts that, as a result, the admissibility of this evidence should be reviewed de novo rather than for an abuse of discretion. Defendant's argument on this point is two-fold: (1) the trial court's admission of the evidence violated Defendant's constitutional right to confront the witnesses against him; and (2) the trial court erred in ruling that the evidence was admissible. Id. We conclude that the alleged failings of counsel in this case do not result in ineffective assistance of counsel regardless of whether they are considered individually or cumulatively. In any event, we do not agree that Detective Shawn is the person in the best position to gauge the candor of Ortiz's statement. All dates selected Filter by filing date. On November 13, 1997, this Court filed its opinion in Baca, 1997-NMSC-059, 51, 124 N.M. 333, 950 P.2d 776, holding that conspiracy to commit depraved-mind murder is not a cognizable crime in New Mexico. {13} At trial, Defendant objected to the admission of Ortiz's taped statement on general impeachment and hearsay grounds. The majority admits Ortiz's out of court statements under Rule 11-803(X) NMRA 2002. New Mexico State Police now say Rivera, who was 19 years old at the time, was kidnapped and killed by her ex-husband, Christopher Trujillo, with the help of his cousin Anselmo "Chemo" Ortiz. {59} Defendant next claims that the prosecutor improperly injected his own opinion during closing arguments on the definition of at for shooting at a dwelling or occupied building charges. {21} Under these circumstances, we find that the taped statement and transcript were reliable and important for the jury to consider, as it went to the identity of the shooters. FindLaw.com Free, trusted legal information for consumers and legal professionals, SuperLawyers.com Directory of U.S. attorneys with the exclusive Super Lawyers rating, Abogado.com The #1 Spanish-language legal website for consumers, LawInfo.com Nationwide attorney directory and legal consumer resources. Two months later, on March 23, police say 35-year-old Trujillo beat and strangled Pound before staging the scene to look like a suicide attempt. The fact finder can reject the defendant's version of an incident. State v. Vigil, 87 N.M. 345, 350, 533 P.2d 578, 583 (1975). 11/21/2022 11:53 PM. Q. {76} The majority also reasons that because Ortiz put himself and his family in danger by giving a description of the shooters to the police, it is less likely that he lied. 1. The majority holding otherwise, I respectfully dissent. {82} The Court of Appeals has said of the essentially identical predecessor to Rule 11-803(X) that it cannot be read to mean that hearsay which almost, but not quite, fits another specific exception, may be admitted under the other exceptions' subsection State v. Barela, 97 N.M. 723, 726, 643 P.2d 287, 290 (Ct.App.1982). During the prosecution's direct examination of Detective Shawn, the prosecutor elicited testimony that indicated he had interviewed three eyewitnesses to the shooting: Ortega, Ortiz, and Canas. {55} Canas was arrested on a material witness warrant but was not interviewed by the defense and apparently fled the jurisdiction prior to trial. Counsel may not have had as much time to review the jury questionnaires as he would have liked, but the record indicates that he in fact conducted a thoughtful voir dire in which he engaged in an active discussion with the panel. {39} Defendant claims that the following flaws in defense counsel's performance resulted in ineffective assistance: counsel was unprepared to start trial, he failed to review jury questionnaires prior to jury selection, he failed to complete his interview with Ortega, he failed to interview, secure the presence of, or secure a continuance until such time as Canas could be located, he failed to object to prejudicial hearsay statements, he elicited highly prejudicial evidence against his own client, and he failed to challenge an indictment for a nonexistent crime. The jury had testimony from two other eyewitnesses, Ortiz and Ortega, that support its findings of guilt. Liked by Christopher Trujillo Kevin Mitnick is known as the world's most famous hacker, and Riverbed's Vincent Berk is a highly experienced cybersecurity expert. Chris Trujillo is an Agent at New York Life Insurance based in New York City, New York. Finally, we find there was little danger that Ortiz misjudged, misinterpreted, or misunderstood what he saw that evening because there were no impediments to his perception and because he was present throughout the event. Cheryl Trujillo, 92 years old, currently living in Albuquerque, NM. To get a behind-the-scenes glimpse, we chatted with the show's production designer, Chris Trujillo, about the filming locations that brought the horrors to lifeand some of the destinations'. {43} Defendant also claims his trial attorney failed to question Ortega about his alleged statement to his friend Juan Landaras on the night of the shooting, that a third person, Little Guero, not Defendant, was the shooter and that counsel failed to challenge Ortega's conflicting identifications of the shooters. In closing the prosecutor made two references to Canas' statement: Let me take you to the balcony. See Sutphin, 107 N.M. at 131, 753 P.2d at 1319. Chris Trujillo has been working as a Program Analyst at Los Alamos National laboratory for . Dissent 79. The State also presented evidence that there was a verbal exchange between Allison, Defendant and Mendez and that some gang identification prompted the shooting. The dissent notes that the statement lacks circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness because Detective Shawn, the person in the best position to gauge the candor of the out of court statement felt that Ortiz was lying to him. Parties alleging fundamental error must demonstrate the existence of circumstances that shock the conscience or implicate a fundamental unfairness within the system that would undermine judicial integrity if left unchecked. State v. Cunningham, 2000-NMSC-009, 21, 128 N.M. 711, 998 P.2d 176. State v. Garcia, 114 N.M. 269, 275, 837 P.2d 862, 868 (1992). We do not find the trial court's decision to be arbitrary, capricious, or beyond reason. This Court's mandatory appellate jurisdiction is not based on a prison sentence to a term of years, nor is it based on a first-degree murder conviction. {6} Detective Doug Shawn, the officer assigned to the case, testified that he interviewed several eyewitnesses to the shooting, all of whom identified Defendant as one of the shooters and indicated that only one gun had been used. The State asserts without discussion, and without citing to any evidence in the record, that Defendant willfully discharged the gun at an occupied apartment building. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, resolving all conflicts and indulging all permissible inferences to uphold a verdict of conviction, we find that there was no evidence to support the jury's conclusion that Defendant shot at a dwelling or occupied building. He took pride in everything he did and everything he did was for his sons. Are you getting ready to buy a new car? However, [e]vidence is material under Brady only if there is a reasonable probability that, had the evidence been disclosed to the defense, the result of the proceeding would have been different. State v. Baca, 115 N.M. 536, 541, 854 P.2d 363, 368 (Ct.App.1993) (quoting United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667, 682, 105 S.Ct. Nearly 24% of New Mexicans rely on SNAP, the highest rate in the . It is rare that a term of incarceration, which has been authorized by the Legislature, will be found to be excessively long or inherently cruel. State v. Augustus, 97 N.M. 100, 101, 637 P.2d 50, 51 (Ct.App.1981) (finding that the trial court's sentence did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment because it did not exhibit a deliberate indifference to defendant's medical needs, even though prior to sentencing defendant underwent open heart surgery and his surgeon expressed his belief that defendant should never be incarcerated due to his medical problems). While we agree that the rule cannot be used to supply the missing elements to admit evidence which almost, but not quite, meets the requirements of another specific exception, it can be used to admit out-of-court statements that otherwise bear indicia of trustworthiness equivalent to those other specific exceptions. {16} The trial court found the statement admissible under Rule 11-803(X), and we conclude that it did not abuse its discretion by admitting Ortiz's statement under this Rule. As summarized above, there was sufficient evidence to convict Defendant of first-degree depraved-mind murder as either a principal or accessory and conspiracy to commit aggravated battery. We conclude that Defendant's thirty year sentence with the possibility of good time credit does not constitute fundamental error. Defendant asserts that the prosecutor's failure to disclose material evidence to the defense, improper use of leading questions, improper introduction of hearsay evidence, use of inflammatory and irrelevant evidence, and improper argument, distorted the evidence on the crucial issue of identification. Decided: February 05, 2002 Freedman, Boyd, Daniels, Hollander, Goldberg & Cline, P.A., Lisa N. Cassidy, Albuquerque, NM, Phyllis H. Subin, Chief Public Defender, Nancy M. Hewitt, Assistant Appellate Defender, Santa Fe, NM, for Appellant. {73} First, I am not persuaded that the requirements for admission under Rule 11-803(X) were satisfied. Unlike the testimony in Orona, the prosecutor in this case did not substitute his words for those of Ortega. The dissent agrees that as a general matter we should defer to the discretion of the trial judge on evidentiary matters, but argues that [s]uch deference has less force in this case, where it is less than clear from the record that the trial court relied upon Rule 11-803(X) in its ruling. Dissent 80. Despite Defendant's objections, the court admitted the evidence pursuant to Rules 11-803(E), 11-803(X), 11-804(A)(3), and 11-612 NMRA 2002. In that case, we found that the defendant's depraved-mind acts of shooting toward two people at two different times were distinguishable and separate from the shot which actually killed the victim. Della Gonzales also testified that she heard the noise of the bullets from a nearby apartment but that she did not hear the noise of bullets striking a surface or building. 1555, 131 L.Ed.2d 490 (1995), Defendant had knowledge of these two men's juvenile records and has not demonstrated any prejudice which resulted from the State's failure to provide that information. {50} Defendant first argues that the prosecutor engaged in misconduct by failing to disclose material evidence to the defense. [6] Furthermore, Ortiz was present and available for cross-examination, which meant the jury could observe his demeanor and make its own determinations regarding Ortiz's credibility. Because Rule 11-803(X) requires an affirmative showing of such guarantees, I do not believe that it provides a basis for admitting this statement. {41} Defendant next argues that his trial counsel failed to review jury questionnaires prior to jury selection. And I think that notice requirement is a somewhat flexible requirement. The trial court never expressly decided whether the notice requirement is flexible enough to allow use of the rule absent notice. Chris Trujillo is a provider established in Albuquerque, New Mexico and his medical specialization is Pharmacist. Court & Arrest Records He took pride in everything he did and everything he did was for his sons. Implicit in the standard of materiality is the notion that the significance of any particular bit of evidence can only be determined by comparison to the rest. Dec. 20, 2020: An open letter to my school family. {35} Shooting at a dwelling or occupied building consists of willfully discharging a firearm at a dwelling or occupied building. Section 30-3-8(A) (emphasis added). Also brother Lawrence Trujillo and wife Leanne of Albuquerque, NM, and numerous aunts, uncles, cousins and friends. See Danzer v. Prof'l Insurors, Inc., 101 N.M. 178, 180, 679 P.2d 1276, 1278 (1984); see also Govich v. N. Am.