Sisters, Alpha Quill and Robert Tixer . Thus, under our law, adults convicted of first-degree murder may appeal directly to the Supreme Court, as of right, because they will always be sentenced to life imprisonment or death, while it appears juvenile offenders convicted of first-degree murder may not be able to appeal their convictions directly to the Supreme Court because the trial court has discretion to sentence them to less than a life sentence. {2} Pursuant to Rule 12-102(A)(1) NMRA 2002, Defendant raises the following issues on appeal: (1) the admission of the tape and transcript of Joseph Ortiz's out-of-court statement violated Defendant's constitutional right to confrontation and due process because it was inadmissible impeachment and hearsay evidence; (2) his conviction for first-degree depraved-mind murder violated due process of law because sufficient evidence did not support the conviction on any theory; (3) Defendant was convicted of a crime that does not exist-conspiracy to commit depraved-mind murder; (4) there was no evidence that Defendant shot at a dwelling or occupied building; (5) Defendant's trial counsel's performance constituted ineffective assistance of counsel; (6) the prosecutor's acts of misconduct distorted the evidence on the issue of identification, depriving Defendant of due process and a fair trial; (7) the conspiracy charges and Defendant's convictions violate the Double Jeopardy Clause because there is no evidence of any agreement or agreements to support separate charges; (8) the above constitute cumulative error that denied Defendant due process and a fair trial; and (9) Defendant's sentence is disproportionate and in violation of the state and federal constitutional prohibitions against cruel and unusual punishment. He then testified that all three identified both Allison and Defendant as the shooters and that they had all told him that only one gun was used. Defendant argues that the only evidence presented at trial suggesting that he was the one who shot directly at Mendez was improperly before the court and that no evidence supports the finding that Defendant intended that Allison shoot Mendez or that he encouraged him to shoot. We are also not persuaded that had the defense attorney received the requested rap sheets that contained Ortega's and Mendez's juvenile history, any difference in the outcome would have resulted. He also asserts that no evidence showed that Defendant knew anything about Allison's intentions or that he encouraged Allison to shoot Mendez. Defendant supports his argument with his counsel's own statement, If I would have been able to interview Jesus, put him under oath, we could have had a statement here So I've been thwarted in that. As noted above, Canas and Ortega were arrested and brought in on material witness warrants shortly before trial. Id. Although this description might help the police find the alleged perpetrators, I do not believe we ought to characterize it as a statement of identification under Rule 11-801(D)(1)(c), because in it Ortiz did not match any current suspect to the people he witnessed at the crime scene. 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. Q. {47} We consider the entire proceeding as a whole and judge any claim of ineffectiveness on whether counsel's conduct so undermined the proper functioning of the adversarial process that the trial cannot be relied on as having produced a just result. State v. Richardson, 114 N.M. 725, 727, 845 P.2d 819, 821 (Ct.App.1992) (quoting Strickland, 466 U.S. at 686, 104 S.Ct. Herrera stated that his findings were consistent with other physical evidence that tended to demonstrate that the shots were fired only downward. He was raised with his fourteen siblings in what was always an entertaining and loving environment. {20} Turning to the other three criteria required by the Rule, first, the statement was offered as evidence of a material fact-the identity of the shooters. 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. Rule 12-102(A)(1) provides that appeals from the district courts in which a sentence of death or life imprisonment has been imposed shall be taken to the Supreme Court. About. He was born and raised in Bernal, New Mexico to Ted Trujillo and LuAnna Bustamante. This is where it happened, and that sounds like a consistent story and that comes from Canas and Iguado and Ortiz, you don't discount that and throw that out and try and derive the story if you're Detective Shawn . {69} I would remand this case for a new trial. {85} Finally, Rule 11-801(D)(1)(c) (statements of identification) would not allow the statements to come in because Ortiz's interview did not identify either of the two shooters but instead described the shooting. Luciano (Lucky) (Caddy) Trujillo, 78, of Pojoaque, passed away on October 28, 2021 at his home in Nambe. online Voody Load 2022 Page 3. {70} I agree that Defendant properly invoked this Court's mandatory appellate jurisdiction, that he failed to preserve a Confrontation Clause claim, that he was improperly convicted of conspiracy to commit depraved mind murder, and that he was improperly convicted of multiple counts of conspiracy to commit shooting at a dwelling or occupied building. He is not prepared to proceed today, Your Honor. This comment was apparently made by the prosecutor in response to defense counsel's request for a one-day continuance. On May 25 {3} On July 3, 1997, Defendant and Charlie Allison were outside on a second-floor apartment balcony in the Barelas neighborhood of Albuquerque when they became involved in an argument with four men located at ground level: Joseph Ortiz, Juan Ortega, Jesus Canas, and Javier Mendez. In both instances the objections were sustained, but no limiting instruction was requested. And I've instructed the State that that did not open the door and I don't want that pursued, but that's as far as I'm going to go. Judge Victor S. Lopez presiding. Pound was taken to the hospital and removed from. First, the dissent's discussion suggests that Detective Shawn found Ortiz's statement generally untruthful. When he just-when like-they just started shooting when he said, Juaritos. When he said, I could be anywhere I want, Juaritos, they just started shooting. Although accessory liability might make Defendant legally culpable whether or not he fired the fatal shots, I think it is fair to say that most people would view a shooter who missed his target less culpable than one who slays his target. Domestic space is described as a place of safety, security, and . He stated that he was beaten up by other gang members when he was ranked out because he was no longer hanging out with them. Colfax County, New Mexico, USA will be saved to your photo volunteer list. we must avoid concentrating on the suppressed evidence in isolation. We therefore reverse Defendant's convictions for conspiracy to commit shooting at a dwelling or occupied building (great bodily harm), conspiracy to commit shooting at a dwelling or occupied building (resulting in injury), shooting at a dwelling or occupied building (no injury), and conspiracy to commit shooting at a dwelling or occupied building (no injury). But what Detective Shawn found was consistent. I'm a Content Strategist focused on Information Architecture and Digital Distribution Design. The majority admits Ortiz's out of court statements under Rule 11-803(X) NMRA 2002. 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. Chris Trujillo has been working as a Program Analyst at Los Alamos National laboratory for . Section 34-5-8(A)(3) indicates that the Court of Appeals has appellate jurisdiction over criminal actions, except those in which a judgment of the district court imposes a sentence of death or life imprisonment. (Emphasis added.) [6] {19} The dissent concludes that with respect to the second danger, lack of candor, Ortiz did in fact have a motive to lie and therefore his statement lacked circumstantial guarantees and was inherently untrustworthy. Dissent 74. Prison pen pals seeking friendship. We conclude that Defendant's gang membership was undisputed by the defense and that the State used evidence of gangs to the extent that it was relevant to its case. Chris was a. We review each of Defendant's allegations of prosecutorial misconduct individually in addition to considering their cumulative effect. Second of all, I think it would be to your disadvantage for me to reiterate what it was because then they will really focus on the fact that he allegedly was buying a handgun. {1} Defendant Chris Trujillo was convicted of first-degree depraved-mind murder, conspiracy to commit first-degree depraved-mind murder, aggravated assault, conspiracy to commit aggravated battery, conspiracy to commit shooting at a dwelling or occupied building (great bodily harm), conspiracy to commit shooting at a dwelling or occupied building (resulting in injury), shooting at a dwelling or occupied building (no injury), and conspiracy to commit shooting at a dwelling or occupied building (no injury).1 The jury found Defendant not guilty of aggravated battery, aggravated assault, shooting at a dwelling or occupied building (great bodily injury), and shooting at a dwelling or occupied building (resulting in injury). 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. Refine Your Search Results All Filters 1 Christopher M Trujillo, 49 Resides in Las Vegas, NM Lived In Henderson NV, Las Vegas NV, Chula Vista CA, Virginia Beach VA El Prado, NM. Find out which cars have the lowest insurance rates, plus key factors that affect your car insurance premiums. Cheryl Trujillo's phone number is (505) 292 - 5391. 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. It is evident from the record that the trial judge recognized that the defense attorney had not completed his interviews at that point and made some arrangement for him to complete them prior to opening statements. {84} We have already noted in the related case State v. Allison, 2000-NMSC-027, 30, 129 N.M. 566, 11 P.3d 141, that Rule 11-803(E) is not a proper ground for the admission of this statement. Defendant urges us to find that because of these facts, and because he was a child at the time of the crime, his sentence is so disproportionate as to shock the general conscience or violate principles of fundamental unfairness. We acknowledge that [a] sentence may constitute cruel and unusual punishment if its length is disproportionate to the crime punished, Burdex, 100 N.M. at 202, 668 P.2d at 318, and that it is within the province of the judiciary to review whether a sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of a constitutional provision. State v. Rueda, 1999-NMCA-033, 10, 126 N.M. 738, 975 P.2d 351. See Baca, 1997-NMSC-059, 51, 124 N.M. 333, 950 P.2d 776 (holding that a conviction for conspiracy to commit first-degree depraved-mind murder could not stand under current case law because conspiracy requires both intent to agree and intent to commit the offense which is the object of the conspiracy and depraved-mind murder is an unintentional killing resulting from highly reckless behavior); cf. 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. He is preceded in death by his great grandmother Flora Ortiz, grandfathers Johnny Bustamante, Manuel Trujillo, Luis Avitia, uncles Eric Bustamante, Mark Trujillo, aunts Elaine Whatley, Darlene Anaya and numerous other relatives. Read More Contact Chris Trujillo's Phone Number and Email Last Update 11/19/2022 5:44 PM Email c***@newyorklife.com The practitioner's primary taxonomy code is 183500000X with license number RP00007033 (NM). In fourteen pages of transcript discussion, the trial court only once mentions Rule 11-803(X) and it certainly cannot be said to be the thrust of the State's argument. 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. I concur in parts II, III(A), IV, V, VI, VIII, IX and XI. See Baca, 1997-NMSC-059, 24, 124 N.M. 333, 950 P.2d 776. 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. He is a Taos High School graduate of (1998). {4} Ortiz, Allison's cousin, was a former Barelas gang member who had been ranked out and was apparently no longer welcome in the area. A. {51} The trial judge denied Defendant's motion to dismiss on the basis that it came down to a swearing match between the two attorneys and she found no prejudice to the Defendant. Q. We therefore hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting the tape and transcript into evidence under Rule 11-803(X). 2. There is no question that Mendez's death was caused by a depraved-mind act, the hail of bullets from the balcony. Q. Ortega testified that Allison shot at Mendez first and then Defendant took the gun from Allison and shot at the other two. Entering his junior year, the Auburn commit has a career on-base percentage of .512 in more than 50 games at the varsity level. 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. Pursuant to NMSA 1978, 30-2-1(A)(3) (1994) (first-degree depraved-mind murder); 30-2-1(A)(3) and NMSA 1978, 30-28-2(B)(1) (1979) (conspiracy to commit first-degree depraved-mind murder); NMSA 1978, 30-3-2(A) (1963) and NMSA 1978, 31-18-16 (1993) (aggravated assault); NMSA 1978, 30-3-5(A) & (C) (1969) and NMSA 1978, 30-28-2(B)(3) (1979) (conspiracy to commit aggravated battery); NMSA 1978, 30-3-8(A) (1993) and NMSA 1978, 30-28-2(B)(2) (1979) (conspiracy to commit shooting at a dwelling or occupied building (great bodily harm)); 30-3-8(A) and 30-28-2(B)(3) (conspiracy to commit shooting at a dwelling or occupied building (resulting in injury)); 30-3-8 (shooting at a dwelling or occupied building (no injury)); and 30-3-8(A) and 30-28-2(B)(3) (conspiracy to commit shooting at a dwelling or occupied building (no injury)). I therefore respectfully dissent from part III(B). Accordingly, we conclude that the prosecutor's leading questions did not constitute fundamental error. The court indicated that as to the identity of the shooter, Defendant was not prejudiced because Canas could have testified that the shooter was bald, but at the same time he may have elicited information that that bald person's name was Silly [Defendant's alias]. {18} With respect to ambiguity, we conclude that there is no danger that the meaning intended by Ortiz will be misinterpreted because the taped statement was played to the jury and the jury had the opportunity to interpret Ortiz's statement themselves rather than rely on some other witness's interpretation. Ortega unequivocally testified that Defendant and Allison were the shooters, and the jury was given the opportunity to consider Ortiz's prior statement to that effect. According to our new study, State of Contact Center Conversation Intelligence 2022, 48% . {15} As a general rule, the [a]dmission of evidence is entrusted to the discretion of the trial court, and rulings of the trial judge will not be disturbed absent a clear abuse of discretion.2 State v. Worley, 100 N.M. 720, 723, 676 P.2d 247, 250 (1984); see also Lopez, 2000-NMSC-003, 10, 128 N.M. 410, 993 P.2d 727; State v. Torres, 1998-NMSC-052,15, 126 N.M. 477, 971 P.2d 1267; State v. Stout, 96 N.M. 29, 32, 627 P.2d 871, 874 (1981). 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. Contact. Trujillo was a member of Ozzy Osbourne's band for a number of years starting in the late 1990s. We have thousands of pen pals in prison to select from. A. At trial, Ortega positively identified Defendant as the second shooter, stating that he took the gun away from Allison and began shooting at Ortega and Canas. However, this conviction has been vacated, and Defendant has not demonstrated that had he timely challenged this indictment he would have been acquitted of his other convictions. This narrow interpretation of the rule has been rejected by a majority of circuits, and we decline to adopt it in our jurisdiction. {9} We conclude that serious youthful offenders convicted of first-degree murder shall be allowed to invoke this Court's mandatory appellate jurisdiction under Article VI, Section 2 of the New Mexico Constitution and Rule 12-102(A)(1). The United States Supreme Court has held that the suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution. Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87, 83 S.Ct. State v. Ross, 1996-NMSC-031, 122 N.M. 15, 20, 919 P.2d 1080, 1085. Furthermore, Detective Shawn also testified that he believed Ortiz's statement was truthful because it was consistent with other witnesses' testimony and the physical evidence found at the scene. Email. Although it appears that defense counsel did not interview Ortega prior to opening statements, the court noted that it would allow counsel to finish interviewing him before he took the stand. However, Ortiz apparently could not recall more specific details of the shooting, including who fired the gun. This Constitutional provision is buttressed by Rule 12-102(A)(1) and NMSA 1978, 34-5-8(A)(3) (1983) which reiterate this limitation to our jurisdiction. {7} Defendant was tried, convicted, and sentenced for first-degree murder as a serious youthful offender pursuant to NMSA 1978, 31-18-15.3(D) (1993), which allows a district court to sentence the offender to less than, but not exceeding, the mandatory term for an adult. NMSA 1978, 31-18-14(A) (1993) grants the district court discretion in sentencing minors who have been convicted of a capital felony: [I]f the defendant has not reached the age of majority at the time of the commission of the capital felony for which he was convicted, he may be sentenced to life imprisonment but shall not be punished by death. (Emphasis added.) He earned his wings too soon on May 4, 2021. He Then left school to pursue his dream in the Arts. On cross-examination, Detective Shawn testified that at the time of the interview he felt that Ortiz knew who the shooters were but was concealing their identity. Defendant specifically cites to two excerpts in the record that he claims were crucial to Defendant's conviction in which the prosecutor improperly elicited testimony on the issue of identification. Leave a sympathy message to the family in the guestbook on this memorial page of . 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. No. [T]o establish ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant must point to specific lapses by trial counsel. State v. Brazeal, 109 N.M. 752, 757, 790 P.2d 1033, 1038 (Ct.App.1990). However, as Defendant did not raise this issue below, it was not properly preserved for appellate review. He was born and raised in Bernal, New Mexico to Ted Trujillo and LuAnna Bustamante. {44} We next consider Defendant's argument that defense counsel was ineffective in failing to interview, secure the presence of, or secure a continuance until such time as Canas could be located. Experience . Defendant's reliance on these cases is misplaced. {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. Chris Trujillo. [6] Trujillo co-wrote several songs on the Down to Earth album. {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. Brandon Trujillo - New Mexico. Alejandro Trujillo was one of five men who were shot dead by soldiers in Nuevo Laredo, Mexican. Prosecutorial misconduct rises to the level of fundamental error when it is so egregious and had such a persuasive and prejudicial effect on the jury's verdict that the defendant was deprived of a fair trial. Because we find substantial evidence in the record to support Defendant's convictions, and because Defendant failed to demonstrate circumstances that shock the conscience or show a fundamental unfairness, we find no fundamental error. This is where Chris became interested in law enforcement. at 560, 874 P.2d at 21 (quoting State v. Taylor, 103 N.M. 189, 197, 704 P.2d 443, 451 (Ct.App.1985)). The trial court also provided that [i]t is this Court's intention that the Defendant be eligible for good time credit as to the sentence imposed. (Emphasis omitted.) 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). {32} Defendant is liable for the crime of first-degree depraved-mind murder whether or not he fired the fatal shot. {66} Section 31-18-15.3(D) provides: When an alleged serious youthful offender is found guilty of first degree murder, the court shall sentence the offender pursuant to the provisions of the Criminal Sentencing ActThe court may sentence the offender to less than, but not exceeding, the mandatory term for an adult. Adults convicted of first-degree murder shall be punished by life imprisonment or death. Section 31-18-14(A).