Category: Albuquerque

  • Judge eases pretrial conditions for Fabian Gonzales

    ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — A 2nd Judicial District Court judge denied a motion to put a man tied to a grisly child killing back in jail.

    Instead, Judge Charles Brown eased pretrial release conditions on Fabian Gonzales to allow him to work outside Bernalillo County and to be unsupervised around children. Gonzales will now be allowed to live with his girlfriend and her children.

    Gonzales, 35, is charged with reckless abuse of a child resulting in death, tampering with evidence and conspiracy to commit tampering with evidence in the death of 10-year-old Victoria Martens in August 2016.

    Gonzales was previously required to live at a residence determined by the court’s Pretrial Services Division and was not supposed to have contact with minors unless he was supervised by another adult, among other restrictions. He was released from jail in November.

    Earlier this month, staff with Healthcare for the Homeless told the court’s Judicial Supervision and Diversion Program that Gonzales was at the facility with his girlfriend and her children and was around the children unsupervised for several minutes. Prosecutors then asked Brown to revoke Gonzales’ conditions of release.

    Brown denied the request at a hearing Tuesday morning and removed the condition that Gonzales must be supervised around children. Brown said he wasn’t sure why he ordered Gonzales to have no unsupervised contact with children in the first place. Gonzales was initially charged with killing Martens, but now investigators say the killing was committed by an unknown man.

    “Other than the crime for which he’s charged, there is no evidence that he’s ever been a danger to any child anywhere at anytime,” Brown said during the hearing.

    Bernalillo County District Attorney spokesman Adolfo Mendez said the office can’t appeal Brown’s ruling, but it is looking at other avenues of review.

    “We are disappointed that the district court’s response to Mr. Gonzales’s violation of conditions of release is increased leniency,” Mendez said in an email.

    Stephen Aarons, Gonzales’ attorney, said in an email that the “ruling today reflects how well Mr. Gonzales has done with pretrial supervision: full time employment, a new lease, no alcohol, no drugs, no violations of any kind.”

    Prosecutor Greer Rose said that while Gonzales’ girlfriend was filing for a housing voucher at Healthcare for the Homeless, Gonzales took her son to a nearby gas station to use the bathroom. Brown found that Gonzales did not violate his conditions by doing so.

    “The ruling today reflects how well Mr. Gonzales has done with pretrial supervision: full time employment, a new lease, no alcohol, no drugs, no violations of any kind,” Aarons said in an email. “The district attorney has spent 1,400 days and millions of taxpayer dollars prosecuting the wrong person. When will it end?”

    Brown also granted a defense motion to allow Gonzales to work outside Bernalillo County.

    Brown didn’t grant a defense request to remove Gonzales’ GPS monitor and left it to the discretion of pretrial services.

  • NM Court of Appeals affirms Fabian Gonzales’ release

    ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — Finding it was in accordance with the law and supported by substantial evidence, the state Court of Appeals has affirmed a local judge’s decision to release the man facing charges surrounding the death of 10-year-old Victoria Martens.

    In opting to free Fabian Gonzales, the Court of Appeals wrote, Judge Charles Brown properly considered the defendant’s lack of felony convictions, the dismissal of some of his most serious charges and the strength of the remaining allegations against him.

    Shortly after the child was found dead in her family’s apartment, authorities said that Gonzales had drugged, raped and killed her before dismembering her body. But eventually evidence surfaced showing that Gonzales was not at the apartment at the time of Victoria’s death. The state’s latest theory of the case charges Gonzales with tampering with evidence and child abuse resulting in death. He is accused of helping his cousin dismember the girl’s body after she was reportedly killed by an unidentified man who was looking for Gonzales.

    Gonzales’ attorney did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    A spokesman for the District Attorney’s Office, which filed the unsuccessful appeal, said the office is weighing its options “in order to best protect the community from Gonzales.”

    Gonzales’ attorney Stephen Aarons said in a statement that his client “has been waiting 1,189 days for his day in court.” “The public has a right to know what really happened,” Aarons wrote. “It is high time for the district attorney to stop delaying this trial.”

    Brown’s decision was the subject of social media rage and a protest in front of District Court in Downtown Albuquerque. Gonzales was finally released from jail last week after a more than three-year stay.

    The Court of Appeals order comes less than a week after the state asked the court to review Brown’s decision. In their appeal, prosecutors explained why they believed Gonzales “poses a clear threat to the safety of the community” and should have been detained as he awaits trial in the case.

    They also say Brown found Gonzales was not a threat because his record consists only of misdemeanor convictions and because his most egregious charges had been dismissed. They argued that the decision effectively created a rule requiring prior felony convictions or murder or rape charges in order to classify a defendant as a danger.

    Read the unanimous decision of the Court of Appeals

    Albuquerque Journal ©2019 Reprinted with permission. Contact the writer.

  • Bill to allow petitions to judges to expunge criminal records clears Senate

    Committing a crime might be easy enough. Getting a criminal record expunged in New Mexico is more difficult than almost anywhere in the West.

    Now that is close to changing. The New Mexico Senate on Wednesday voted 28-13 for a bill clearing the way for both the wrongly accused — and those who committed certain crimes — to petition a court for expunction of those records.

    The proposal, House Bill 370, probably would be most important to people convicted of drug offenses or lower-level property crimes.

    But even they would have no guarantees. They would have to serve all their prison time, successfully complete their parole, then wait a prescribed number of years before they even could apply.

    After that, a judge could still deny their request.

    Convicted criminals in an array of cases would not be eligible to try to expunge their record.

    Excluded are those convicted of crimes causing death or great bodily harm; those who committed sex crimes or crimes against children; drunken drivers and embezzlers.

    Still, Sen. Craig Brandt, R-Rio Rancho, said he voted against the bill on grounds that someone convicted of first-degree felonies, such as two armed robberies, could still try to expunge his record.

    Brandt said this was particularly offensive to him because of all the emphasis on gun crimes during this legislative session.

    Paul Haidle, an attorney and senior policy strategist for the ACLU of New Mexico, said in an interview the odds of an armed robber qualifying to erase his criminal history would be minuscule.

    Haidle, who supports the bill, said the robber first would have to have a clean record for at least 28 years, and be able to show that he had caused no bodily harm. Even then, the robber would still be at the mercy of a judge.

    “In theory it’s possible for people convicted of first-degree felonies to apply, but I think it would be a remarkably small number,” Haidle said.

    The Legislature in the last seven years twice approved bills allowing for expunction of some criminal records, but then-Gov. Susana Martinez vetoed each of them.

    Martinez was a career prosecutor before her election as governor, and she had warred with then-Senate Majority Leader Michael Sanchez, D-Belen, sponsor of both those bills.

    With Michelle Lujan Grisham now in the governor’s office, advocates of HB 370 hope the measure has a chance of becoming law.

    The bill is sponsored by Democratic Reps. Antonio “Moe” Maestas of Albuquerque and Andrea Romero of Santa Fe.

    Because senators amended the bill, it will have to go back to the House of Representatives for concurrence. If House members agree with the changes, the bill would advance to Lujan Grisham for her consideration.

    Espanola Expungement Attorney

  • Bill to expunge criminal records moves forward in Santa Fe

    ALBUQUERQUE, N.M.- House Bill 370, which would give people the chance to clear their criminal record, is moving forward in the legislature.

    It passed the full House in February and passed its first committee in the Senate Tuesday.

    Rep. Antonio “Moe” Maestas is sponsoring the bill.

    He said it would give people who are convicted of a misdemeanor or non-violent felony the change to have their criminal record erased after they serve their sentence.

    It would also apply to identity theft cases.

    “So, when you’re eligible, you can petition the court, obviously a lot of horrible crimes you’re ineligible, but you can petition the court and take these off court websites and make them unavailable for the public,” Maestas said. “They’re still available to law enforcement and they’re still available if those federal background checks or state required background checks require an extensive background.”

    Depending on the crime, people could face a waiting period before they could petition the court.

    The decision to expunge a person’s record would ultimately be up to a judge.

    Maestas believes it would be easier for someone to find a job or get housing if their criminal record is cleared.

    “If you got arrested in your early 20s, and you’re applying for a big, real job in your 40s, you have to explain it, that’s not who you are,” Maestas said. “Over the course of 10 or 20 years, you can expunge those arrest records which remain on your record and have a fresh start for employment”

    However, Terri Cole, president and CEO of the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce, said the bill means employers wouldn’t have the full picture of who they’re hiring.

    “The bill would wipe out the criminal histories of not only some non-violent offenders but some serious offenders and that is a big problem for business,” Cole sale.

    She believes an employer should be able to know all the facts about an applicant’s history, including any criminal record.

    “Business has to be able to understand the criminal histories of people they are hiring because those some people will be interacting with their clients, with their employees, with their customers, so they have a right to know who they’re hiring and what those criminal histories look like,” Cole said.

    The bill is now set to be heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee. If it passes, it will head to the Senate floor for a vote.

    Track this bill during the legislative session

    New Mexico Expungement Lawyer

    Albuquerque Expungement Lawyer

     

  • Court questions appeal in Fabian Gonzales case

    BY KATY BARNITZ / JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

    ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — The state Court of Appeals is asking the District Attorney’s Office to explain whether its appeal in the Fabian Gonzales case should be dismissed as moot following his cousin’s no contest plea.

    Gonzales, along with his cousin Jessica Kelley, are defendants in a case centered on the death of 10-year-old Victoria Martens. In an agreement last month with the DA’s Office, Kelley pleaded no contest to reckless child abuse resulting in death, tampering with evidence and aggravated assault. She also promised to testify against Gonzales.

    Prosecutors in September appealed Judge Charles Brown’s decision to exclude statements Jessica Kelley made in jail, along with evidence of her drug use and prior convictions.

    Gonzales had been set for trial in mid-October, but the appeal put his case on hold indefinitely.

    In an order filed last Thursday, the Court of Appeals noted that Kelley’s plea agreement and availability to testify may have rendered moot the argument asserted in the appeal.

    A spokesman for the DA’s Office said prosecutors will file a response in coming days.

    Gonzales’ attorney Stephen Aarons filed a response asking the court to dismiss the appeal and send the case back to the District Court for trial.

  • RESPONSE TO STATE’S MOTION TO RECONSIDER SENTENCE

    THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

    COUNTY OF SANDOVAL

    STATE OF NEW MEXICO

    STATE OF NEW MEXICO

    Plaintiff,

    v. No. D-1329-CR-201800142

    Chief Judge Louis P. McDonald, Div V

    CHRISTIE NORIEGA,

    Defendant.

    RESPONSE TO STATE’S MOTION TO RECONSIDER SENTENCE

    DEFENDANT submits the following in opposition to the State’s Motion to Reconsider Sentence as filed on 30 January 2019 (“Motion”):

    1. On 1 November 2018 Ben Klein, Ph.D., Clinical Psychologist, provided to the court and counsel of record on behalf of the New Mexico Department of Corrections a nine (9) page Diagnostic Evaluation of defendant. Under medical history on page 4, Dr. Klein reported that defendant “has been diagnosed with a fatty liver” and she has been prescribed loratidine and ranitidine. Because diseased livers cannot eliminate alcohol, and defendant was not diagnosed until after the accident, Dr. Klein thought she did not make impulsive or reckless decisions about her alcohol use” before she drove home. Id. 9.

    2. In the Motion, the prosecutor argues that “Defendant’s non-alcoholic fatty liver disease was not mentioned as a bar to incarceration until the sentence hearing.” Motion at page 1. This “did not allow time for the State’s attorney to contact the Department of Corrections about the availability of treatment for Defendant’s possible health issue.” Id.

    3. One day before the sentence hearing, defense counsel delivered a sentence memorandum to the court and emailed a copy late that evening to the prosecutor. In the letter of transmittal, defense counsel argued: “As a result of her illness, her body did not process the alcohol which she had consumed like someone with a healthy liver. This helps to explain why she seemed sober to her cousin when she left Santa Fe yet had a blood alcohol content of 0.140 hours after the fatal accident.” Counsel thus argued in mitigation, not that a liver disease would bar any imprisonment.

    4. At the sentence hearing on 24 January 2019, defense counsel’s opening remarks regarding the medical condition likewise were in mitigation of the blood alcohol content, not a bar to imprisonment: “Her family did not know, she did not know that she suffers from a non-alcoholic liver disease, which prevented her body from absorbing and eliminating alcohol. This is not an excuse for her choices, but it does help explain what happened.” Transcript, page 4, lines 21-24 (TR-4.21-24).

    5. Defense psychologist Elizabeth Penland, Ph.D., did discuss the medical condition along with her psychological opinions.1 She doubted whether defendant would receive a restricted diet for her liver.2

    6. Thus defense counsel and her expert did not argue that the inability to treat the disease barred incarceration. Given that the court imposed three years of prison, the court did not treat the issue as a complete bar.

    7. The court expressed concerns about whether the Department of Corrections will make necessary accommodations for defendant’s illness. Defense counsel suggested: “we could call her doctor on another date.” TR-19.24-25.3

    8. In answer to the accommodations question, the prosecution weighed against a continuance, stating, “I don’t think they have a choice. There [are] other inmates who are sick and it is not an option. The State is confident that, given the direction, they would do so.” TR-20-10-13. 19.

    9. In stark contrast to the defendant, whose counsel agreed to continue the hearing before pronouncement of sentence to allow defendant to submit a letter from her the treating physician and the prosecution a letter from the department, the prosecutor wanted to go ahead with sentencing:

    THE COURT: What would you propose?

    MS. LOPEZ DOOLING: The State would propose that we go ahead with sentencing. If the Court orders incarceration, certainly we can have someone evaluate her and ensure that any treatment she is required is put in the Judgment and Sentence. If they fail to comply, then that’s another issue that the Court can consider.

    TR-20.24 to TR-21.5 (emphasis added).

    1. Despite moving forward without a letter, the prosecution now submits a belated letter suggesting that defendant was “missed diagnosed” and the department looks forward to accommodating her special dietary and exercise needs. Motion, attachment 1. This is too little, too late.

    MEMORANDUM OF LAW

    1. The New Mexico Constitution states “nor shall any person be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense. NM Const. Art II, § 15; see also US Const. Amend V.

    2. It is a well established principle of New Mexico law that a trial court generally cannot increase a valid sentence once a defendant begins serving that sentence.” State v. Porras, 1999-NMCA-016, 126 N.M. 628 (citations omitted),4 see also United States v. Rosenstreich, 204 F.2d 321 (2nd Cir 1953)(“It is well settled that, thanks to the double-jeopardy provision of the Fifth Amendment, a federal court may not increase a sentence of imprisonment, once execution of the sentence has begun”).

    3. The United States Supreme Court agreed long ago:

    If there is anything settled in the jurisprudence of England and America, it is that no man can be twice lawfully punished for the same offence. And though there have been nice questions in the application of this rule to cases in which the act charged was such as to come within the definition of more than one statutory offence, or to bring the party within the jurisdiction of more than one court, there has never been any doubt of its entire and complete protection of the party when a second punishment is proposed in the same court, on the same facts, for the same statutory offence.

    Ex parte Lange, 85 U.S. 163, 168 (1873)(emphasis added).

    1. The New Mexico Supreme Court amended NMRA 5-801 from “Modification” to “Reduction of Sentence” because district courts may reduce but not increase a sentence after it has been imposed. NM Supreme Court Order 14-8300-014.

    2. The prosecution cites one case, and only one case, to support any legal authority to increase a sentence once imposed. Motion at page 2 citing State v. Diaz, 1983-NMSC-090, 100 N.M. 524. In Diaz the defendant made derogatory comments about the court after it suspended his sentence but before the judgment was reduced to writing. “We further determine that no portion of Diaz’ sentence was carried out.” 100 N.M. at 525.

    CONCLUSION

    1. Defendant began serving her sentence immediately after the oral pronouncement, with credit for pre-sentence confinement. Unlike a suspended sentence in Diaz, defendant’s post-sentence incarceration is being carried out and that alone raises the constitutional prohibition against the ordeal of a second hearing at which she could once again face up to thirty years and ninety days of prison were the court to exercise its discretion in a less lenient manner. Given the political pressure brought to bear on this case by parties poorly informed beyond sensational media accounts, a reconsideration would create the appearance of undue political influence.

    2. Alternatively, if the letter does not persuade the court that more time is due, if the reasons for suspending 27 years were more complicated than a medical accommodation, then reconsideration would raise false hopes in the victims’ family members firmly convinced that the court erred, once again dashing hopes that at last their brand of justice will be meted out.

    3. The prosecution could have easily joined in a defense suggestion that the hearing be continued and the parties collect letters like the one attached to its Motion. Instead the prosecution proposed “that we go ahead with sentencing.” Having opted to go forward without its letter, it should not be heard to complain that the sentence was less than expected.

    WHEREFORE defendant requests under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution and Article II, Section 15 the New Mexico Constitution, that the court:

    1. Find that (1) the court is sufficiently informed so that oral argument of counsel will not be necessary or helpful to its decision; (2) the defendant has begun to serve her term of post-sentence confinement; (3) the court has no jurisdiction as a matter of law to increase a sentence under these circumstances; and (4) in any event the new matters would not have persuaded the court to do so; and,

    2. Deny the Motion.

    Stephen D Aarons

    Counsel for Defendant

    2019 Galisteo Street, Suite H1

    Santa Fé NM 87505

    steve@aarons.law

    (505) 984-1100

    Certificate of Service

    On 31 January 2019 I emailed a copy of this pleading to the prosecutor, Amy Lopez Dooling, Assistant 13th Judicial District Attorney, PO Box 1750, Bernalillo NM 87004-1750 alopezdooling@da.state.nm.us (505) 771-7400.

    Stephen D Aarons

    Defense Counsel

    1See e.g. TR-10.9-13 (“Ms. Noriega does have what’s called ‘non-alcoholic fatty liver,’ which interferes with the liver processing and detoxing the pollutants and the toxins that come through the body. I personally do not believe that this was a reliable test of the blood alcohol level.”). The Motion does not contest the medical diagnosis or its effect on blood alcohol content measurements but rather whether the department of corrections is equipped to treat inmates with this disease.

    2TR 12.5-13 (“in the prisons of Colorado and New Mexico, the food that I see the inmates are served is horrible. It’s absolutely horrible. I know Your Honor knows that. They don’t have the food that will keep her alive. Because of her liver disease, it was written – I don’t have her medical records, but it was written that she should have solid nutrition, fresh vegetables and fresh fruits. I think this disease could turn into something more serious, such as liver disease”).

    3See also TR-21.2-17 (“MR. AARONS: Well, all I can offer is the – I can have the doctor write something up. There is discussion here about what is recommended for her. But in terms of the Department of Corrections, it probably would be incumbent on the State to present a letter or a person to say what accommodations they could and would make”).

    4The district court may correct clerical mistakes if the written judgment does not correspond to the oral pronouncement, resulting in an illegal sentence. State v. Stejskal, 2018 NMCA-045 citing NMRA 5-113(B).

  • Plea deal accepted in death of Victoria Martens

    ELISE KAPLAN / JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

    Copyright © 2019 Albuquerque Journal reprinted with permission

    Jessica Kelley will not be going to trial in the brutal slaying of Victoria Martens.

    In a nearly empty courtroom Monday – watched only by the media, a couple of investigators and Victoria’s crying grandparents – 34-year-old Kelley pleaded no contest to child abuse recklessly caused resulting in death, tampering with evidence and aggravated assault.

    The plea was accepted by Judge Charles Brown.

    She faces a total of 50 years in prison. Since she has two prior felony convictions, she will be sentenced as a habitual offender, which adds 20 years in prison to the sentence.

    But Kelley has the possibility of cutting her time in prison down to 20 years total with good behavior.

    The plea agreement is similar to one Brown rejected last September.

    Although the District Attorney’s Office and Kelley’s defense attorneys had agreed to that deal at the time, Judge Brown said they had not presented enough evidence that Kelley was guilty of child abuse.

    At a news conference after the plea hearing, District Attorney Raúl Torrez said the primary difference this time is that Kelley is pleading “no contest” – or saying while she is not admitting guilt, she is not contesting the state’s narrative.

    “We were able to fashion an agreement that substantially exposes Ms. Kelley to the same amount of time in the Department of Corrections and satisfies the concerns of the court,” Torrez said. “It also brings some finality at least to the second of the three suspects that are charged with the death of Victoria Martens.”

    Kelley is the second suspect to take a plea deal in the case.

    Victoria’s mother, Michelle Martens, pleaded guilty to child abuse recklessly caused resulting in death over the summer, and she faces between 12 and 15 years in prison.

    Martens’ boyfriend, Fabian Gonzales, is charged with child abuse resulting in death and tampering with evidence. His trial has been delayed pending a ruling by the New Mexico Court of Appeals.

    His attorney, Steve Aarons, said his client is innocent and will not take a plea deal.

    “We are disappointed that the prosecution settled for a child abuse conviction against Jessica Kelley for her brutal murder and dismemberment of Victoria Martens,” Aarons wrote in an email. “On the other hand, by pleading and agreeing to testify as the prosecution’s star witness, Kelley will be subject to cross examination at our trial.”

    Although police initially said Gonzales and Kelley stabbed and strangled Victoria while Martens watched, prosecutors now say an unidentified man was retaliating against Gonzales when he went to Martens’ apartment and killed her daughter.

    They say that man’s partial DNA sample was left on the little girl’s body and he has been indicted as a “John Doe.”

    Torrez said he hopes the plea deal his office struck with Kelley will strengthen the case against Gonzales and will help identify and prosecute John Doe.

    No sexual assault

    Less than 24 hours after the August 2016 morning when 10-year-old Victoria’s body was found mutilated and on fire in the bathtub of her mother’s Northwest Albuquerque apartment, detectives arrested Martens, Gonzales and Gonzales’ cousin, Kelley.

    They were all charged with murder, child abuse and other charges, and Gonzales and Kelley were charged with raping the little girl.

    On Monday, Mark Earnest, Kelley’s defense attorney, announced that over the past two months experts have determined that contrary to the findings in the initial autopsy report, there was not any evidence that Victoria was raped the night she was killed.

    “In totality these three experts that I’m talking about have over 100 years (of experience) …” he said. “They determined that no sexual assault took place. Despite that, early on, the autopsy report in this case indicated that there was sexual assault.”

    Last Friday, the DA’s Office filed charges dismissing rape charges against Kelley, saying there was “not sufficient evidence to connect Jessica Kelley to the charge of criminal sexual penetration.”

    Earnest said he wishes those charges had been dismissed earlier in order to correct the public’s misconceptions about the case.

    “Part of the pretrial publicity in this case, adding to the horrific nature (and it was a horrific crime), was this added element that Victoria had been raped and sexually assaulted, and she wasn’t,” Earnest said. “That the state did not concede until a few days before the trial in this case.”

    “This case was reviewed by seven additional experts, including forensic pathologists, a child sexual abuse expert, and an expert in the changes in genital tissues from sexually transmitted viruses before the autopsy report was finalized,” Sanchez wrote in the statement. “We strongly refute any claims he was unqualified to handle this case.”

    She said officials will be reviewing the independent findings along with OMI’s autopsy report.

    Torrez said this case has illustrated that all the major players in the criminal justice system “can do a much better job.”

    “We do our very best to be professionals,” he said. “To examine the evidence, to look at every angle of the case, to work with law enforcement partners, our partners at the Office of the Medical Investigator and to examine specific cases, but also to learn important lessons for the future.”

    Not a perfect outcome

    Kelley was “tweaking” and experiencing paranoid delusions from methamphetamine the afternoon she agreed to baby sit Victoria while Martens and Gonzales went out, according to the factual basis included with the plea agreement.

    She should have realized she was too intoxicated and impaired to care for a child. When an unknown man arrived at the apartment, asked for Gonzales and went to Victoria’s room, she should have tried to stop him.

    “The man strangled Victoria to the point of death or to the point of causing great bodily harm,” the statement reads. “Evidence would support a reasonable inference that Kelley knew or should have known that the man posed a substantial and unjustifiable risk of serious harm to Victoria.”

    After the man left, Kelley carried Victoria’s body down the stairs, but was interrupted by Martens’ and Gonzales’ return.

    Kelley told Gonzales that Victoria had been killed and the two cousins “agreed to conceal the crime and dispose of Victoria’s body and to hide the murder from Martens by keeping her way from Victoria’s room.”

    After cleaning up the room, Kelley grabbed a clothes iron and struck Martens on the face with it. This is the basis for the aggravated assault charge. There was a struggle between all three suspects and “a short time later, Martens and Gonzales left apartment 808. Kelley then set Victoria’s body on fire and took down two smoke detectors in the apartment.”

    Torrez, flanked by his two lead prosecutors and Art Gonzales, the deputy chief of investigations at Albuquerque Police Department, said the two detectives who had been assisting with the investigation will continue to do so. Art Gonzales did not comment at the news conference, and in response to request for an interview, an APD spokesman merely said, “Today’s plea agreement is a step toward accountability for this heinous crime.”

    Torrez said he did not make the decision to enter a plea deal lightly and he recognizes it’s not the perfect outcome.

    “It is not something that is ideal in terms of what we all would like to see happen in these cases,” he said. “However we are confronted as prosecutors with our ability to present cases based on the facts and the evidence that we have. We, as you know, identified some issues with the initial investigation which altered the course of our prosecution and had to inform our decision to enter into this plea agreement.”

    Apl010719e

    Apl010719d

  • Jessica Kelley pleads no contest to child abuse in Martens case

    ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — One day before the first trial in the Victoria Martens case was scheduled to begin, the defendant, 34-year-old Jessica Kelley pleaded no contest to child abuse recklessly caused, resulting in death, tampering with evidence and aggravated assault.

    She faces 50 years in prison, with the possibility to get out in a little over 20 years for good behavior.

    Kelley is the second defendant in the high profile case to plead in the case.

    Victoria’s mother, Michelle Martens, pleaded guilty to child abuse resulting in death over the summer. She faces between 12 and 15 years in prison with the opportunity for that to be cut in half for good behavior.

    In August 2016, Victoria was discovered dead in her mother’s Northwest Albuquerque apartment. She had been strangled, stabbed and dismembered and her body was on fire.

    Albuquerque Police Department detectives arrested Martens, Martens’s boyfriend Fabian Gonzales and Gonzales’s cousin Kelley and charged them with murder, child abuse, rape and tampering with evidence. However, in late June, District Attorney Raul Torrez announced much of what was known about the case is “simply not true.”

    The most serious charges against Gonzales were dismissed. His trial, which was supposed to begin in October has been delayed pending a decision by the New Mexico Court of Appeals.

    Copyright (c) Albuquerque Journal 2018
    Reprinted with Permission
  • Investigation into fourth Martens suspect ‘has stalled’

    BY KATY BARNITZ / JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

    Two detectives assigned full time to the Victoria Martens homicide case will begin work on unrelated investigations after attempts to identify an elusive fourth suspect have stalled, according to the District Attorney’s Office.

    “In the absence of Jessica Kelley’s continued cooperation following the District Court’s rejection of her plea agreement, the investigation into the unidentified male has stalled,” Michael Patrick, DA’s Office spokesman, said in a statement. “Detectives will continue to work any new leads that are developed, but it is our understanding that they will also support other investigations.”

    In September, Kelley had been set to plead guilty to multiple charges under an agreement that required her to testify at related trials and to offer statements to authorities. District Attorney Raúl Torrez said then that her cooperation was critically important to the state’s investigation into the well-dressed stranger that Kelley says killed the 10-year-old girl. But Judge Charles Brown rejected the plea, saying he was not presented with enough evidence that Kelley committed the crimes to which she was pleading.

    Gilbert Gallegos, spokesman for APD, said the detectives “hit a critical point” in their investigation into the mystery suspect and expressed to their supervisors that they “felt like they could be doing additional work (in other cases) while they wait for these new leads.”

    “They’re still on the case – they’ll still be prepared to go forward if they develop new leads,” he said. “A new lead could come in any number of ways.”

    City spokeswoman Alicia Manzano said in an email Monday that the city is “committed to seeing the case through to the end,” but the police department is “also working on other crimes throughout the city, and needs to make the best use of resources, including detective time.”

    Kelley is set for trial next month; her attorney declined to comment on the development.

    But the announcement came as no surprise to Steve Aarons, the Santa Fe attorney who is representing Kelley’s cousin and co-defendant, Fabian Gonzales.

    “The fourth suspect is a figment of Jessica Kelley’s imagination, just one more false statement to avoid life in prison for her murder of Victoria Martens,” he wrote in an email.

    Kelley said during a September hearing that she was high on meth and baby-sitting Victoria when a man she did not know walked in and killed the girl. Prosecutors said he then told Kelley to clean up the mess or she and her children would be next. Prosecutors say the child was killed in an act of retaliation after Gonzales made threats to members of a rival gang.

    When police were called to the Martens family’s apartment on the West Side hours later, they found the child’s body burning in a bathtub. Kelley and Gonzales, who was dating Victoria’s mother at the time, are accused of dismembering the girl.

    Michelle Martens, the child’s mother, has pleaded guilty to various crimes and faces up to 15 years in prison. Contrary to early accounts of the crime, prosecutors say neither she nor Gonzales was at the apartment at the time of Victoria’s death.

    Kelley had been expected to plead guilty to child abuse resulting in death and lesser charges, and she faced nearly 50 years in prison.

    But Brown said he would not accept that agreement, saying there was no indication that Kelley knew or should have known that the person who entered the apartment intended to kill the child.

    In a press conference shortly after that hearing, Torrez suggested that the rejection would harm his office’s ability to prosecute remaining suspects and to identify the fourth one. And Gallegos said Monday that if Kelley were to accept another plea agreement, detectives could wind up with new leads.

    At trial, she faces numerous charges, including murder and child abuse resulting in death.

    Detectives ‘disappeared’

    Monday’s announcement regarding the investigation comes after the two APD detectives working the case cleared out their workspace at the DA’s Office on Thursday night and left their key cards behind without first notifying prosecutors, Patrick said Friday.

    “There’s no reason for it. They’ve been investigating this case for the better part of two years,” Patrick said. “Suddenly they’ve – without notice or even a phone call – they’ve disappeared.”

    They had been working in a shared space with the DA’s Office, focusing solely on the Martens case.

    Gallegos said that night that the detectives received permission from their supervisors “to work on additional investigations in the department while the prosecution wraps up its trial work in this case.” He said detectives would be available to pursue new leads as they arise.

    By Saturday morning, Patrick said he had been told by APD leadership that “the two detectives will be back on Monday.”

    “It doesn’t appear that the mayor knew that they had been pulled,” Patrick wrote in a text.

    Patrick sent an email Monday afternoon acknowledging the detectives would be working other cases as well.

    Copyright © 2018 Albuquerque Journal

    Reprinted with Permission

  • Gang ties doubted in Martens case

    By Elise Kaplan / Journal Staff Writer Updated: Tuesday, October 2nd, 2018 at 9:02pm

    While the core of the state’s case against Fabian Gonzales rests on his ties to a local street gang and retaliation for threats prosecutors say he made toward rival gang members, Gonzales’ defense attorney has filed motions recently that cast doubt on that narrative.

    The District Attorney’s Office has said that 10-year-old Victoria Martens was raped and strangled in her mother’s apartment in August 2016 because Gonzales threatened rival gang members after a fight at a barbecue a couple of days earlier.

    Prosecutors have written that “the nexus between defendant’s threats to rival gang members and the retaliation that ensued and led to the homicide of Victoria is more than apparent” and claimed repeatedly that Gonzales is a member of the notorious street gang “Thugs Causing Kaos.”

    He is charged with reckless child abuse resulting in death and several counts of tampering with evidence.

    But motions filed by Gonzales’ attorney, Stephen Aarons, question Gonzales’ gang connections.

    “There is no evidence that defendant has ever participated in gang activities or assisted a member of any known gang,” he wrote in a motion. “Defendant did not retaliate for receiving a black eye from a girl, and it is illogical to think he would retaliate in his own home or that some fictitious gang members would retaliate because he was punched in the eye by a girl.”

    In response to emailed questions, Aarons said he believes the District Attorney’s Office is struggling to come up with a motive for the crime.

    “They are NOT saying that Fabian or a member of his ‘gang’ retaliated after he got beat up and hired a hit man to strangle his new girlfriend’s daughter in her bedroom,” he wrote. “Rather, the prosecution is claiming that a RIVAL gang – the judge asked at a recent hearing whether the state thinks there is another gang besides Fabian’s or not – retaliated against something Fabian did after he was beat up at the barbecue party a few days before the murder. The crux of their argument is that an as-yet unidentified gang retaliated when Fabian made threatening texts for several hours after the BBQ.”

    Gang affiliation

    During a stint at the county jail in September 2006, Gonzales did self-identify as a member of the gang “Kriminal Minded Kaos” in an inmate identification sheet, but he said at that time that the gang had disbanded.

    Gonzales, then 21, said that he joined KMK when he was 17. In response to the question, “What did you expect to gain by joining?” Gonzales answered, “I didn’t expect anything I just wanted to show my brother that I love him and I am down for him.”

    Gonzales has “KMK” tattooed on his abdomen and “thug” and “life” tattooed on his forearms, according to booking sheets.

    In response to questions about whether the group is “at war” or enemies with other groups Gonzales said, “The group is gone.”

    A spokeswoman for the Metropolitan Detention Center said that was the only formal interview Gonzales did with the jail’s gang security officers. After subsequent arrests, she said, officers would have kept an eye on Gonzales for any new gang tattoos and would have talked with him about any changes in affiliation.

    If the officers had found signs that he had joined another gang, they would have had him do another formal interview.

    Although initially Gonzales, his cousin Jessica Kelley and Victoria’s mother, Michelle Martens, were charged with rape and murder in the killing of the little girl, last month prosecutors announced a new theory about what happened.

    Kelley has said she was high on methamphetamine and baby-sitting Victoria when a “well-dressed” Mexican man came to the apartment, asked for Gonzales by his street name, and then went into Victoria’s bedroom and killed her.

    In the motions, attorney Aarons downplayed the fight at the barbecue and said interviews with the hosts show that they didn’t believe he was referencing TCK.

    “Further, the people at the barbecue party do not claim to be gang members and did not take defendant seriously when he was upset for getting punched in the eye,” he wrote in a motion.

    The woman who lived in the home and who Gonzales is said to have threatened is not listed in the Metropolitan Detention Center database of gang members, according to a jail spokeswoman.

    Prosecutors say the woman’s boyfriend is in a rival gang, but the man told the defense team’s investigator that he had “left that nonsense when I was a kid,” according to an interview transcript.

    A spokesman for the DA did not answer questions about Gonzales’ gang ties.

    The Court of Appeals is reviewing an appeal by the state on the judge’s ruling excluding statements and other evidence.

    Judge Charles Brown will rule on Aarons’ motions after the case returns to the 2nd Judicial District Court.

    DNA disputed

    Along with gang retaliation, DNA has also been a focus in the evolving case.

    Over the summer, the District Attorney’s Office said it found a partial DNA sample – likely from saliva, hair or skin cells – from an unidentified male on Victoria’s back. More recently, it has said that male DNA was also found under her fingernails and around her neck.

    Last week, Aarons asked for the state to be sanctioned for not turning over all the DNA evidence, a charge prosecutors have disputed.

    “The defendant’s motion is not only without merit but it is in fact wholly frivolous and full of factual misstatements,” prosecutor Greer Rose wrote in response.

    Although Aarons presented the theory that a mixture of DNA from at least five individuals was found on the crotch of a jumpsuit worn by Kelley and could have been transferred to Victoria, Rose said that was “not only outlandish but completely divorced from the actual evidence.”

    The jumpsuit in question did not belong to Kelley. A DA spokesman said the jumpsuit possibly belonged to Victoria and the DNA was not found on the crotch, but on the bottom and the straps.

    While the criminal case is ongoing, Aarons has submitted a tort notice of claim to the city to protect Gonzales’ right to sue for a violation of civil rights.

    On the notice, he says the city is at fault because Gonzales was “wrongfully arrested and detained for the murder of Victoria Martens. Police extracted false confessions and withheld evidence.”

    Copyright © 2018 Albuquerque Journal