chris trujillo new mexico chris trujillo new mexico

And then who took the gun away from Charlie? 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. Cf. 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. Defendant was charged with conspiracy to commit depraved-mind murder on July 22, 1997. Verna Trujillo A Overview. 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. Now, you said Charlie started shooting first. 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. State v. Allison, 2000-NMSC-027, 27-31, 129 N.M. 566, 11 P.3d 141. In that case, we ultimately allowed the admission of Ortiz's out-of-court statement under Rule 11-803(X), not on the merits, but because the defendant in that case did not argue against the use of that rule. {41} Defendant next argues that his trial counsel failed to review jury questionnaires prior to jury selection. [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, by bringing this evidence in through Detective Shawn, Defendant was able to argue that the police did an inadequate investigation, potentially leaving the jury with reasonable doubt as to the identification of the shooters. 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. A. {29} Defendant may also have been convicted of first-degree depraved-mind murder as an accessory to the crime. at 499, 873 P.2d at 245. Because we consider improperly admitted evidence when evaluating the sufficiency of the evidence on appeal, State v. Post, 109 N.M. 177, 181, 783 P.2d 487, 491 (Ct.App.1989), I agree that there is sufficient evidence supporting the conviction of depraved mind murder as a principal or as an accessory. Defense counsel was apparently not timely informed that they had been brought in and, therefore, did not have an opportunity to interview them at that time. El Prado, NM. {79} I also note that the detective who took Ortiz's statement felt that Ortiz was lying to him. 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. View Christopher Trujillo's profile on LinkedIn, the world's largest professional community. The fact that Ortiz most likely would view his cousin as being less culpable had he not fired the fatal shots significantly diminishes any circumstantial guarantee of trustworthiness based on the notion that people do not implicate family members unless believing it to be true. As noted above, Mendez then responded, we can go anywhere we want, Juaritos. We find that the passing of the gun between Allison and Defendant and the evidence of a verbal conflict between the competing gang members immediately preceding the shooting is sufficient evidence for a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that either by words or acts there was an agreement to shoot at the men located below the balcony with a deadly weapon. There may be more than one cause of death. 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. Why WriteAPrisoner? 3. 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. Defendant's case did not go to trial until November 9, 1998, leaving counsel nearly a year to challenge the indictment for this crime. The dissent argues that our analysis under Rule 11-803(X) is misplaced because this exception cannot be read to mean that hearsay which almost, but not quite, fits another specific exception, may be admitted under the other exceptions' subsection Dissent 82 (quoting State v. Barela, 97 N.M. 723, 726, 643 P.2d 287, 290 (Ct.App.1982)). Ortega stated that Allison was the original shooter, firing two or three times at Mendez, and then Defendant took the gun and shot at Canas and Ortega. 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. Dissent 79. 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. While we remind counsel of their obligations of civility and professionalism under the Rules of Professional Conduct, see e.g., Rule 16-804 NMRA 2002, we are not persuaded that this incident, or the trial judge's denial of the request for a continuance, resulted in prejudice to the Defendant. Second, Ortiz's ranking out of the Barelas gang offered a plausible explanation for the start of the quarrel; his former comrades objected to Ortiz showing back up at the scene of his disgrace. 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 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. Carolina possesses extensive experience scaling and launching startups by connecting strategy, data, and operational execution in ambiguous and challenging environments. After a lengthy discussion of that rule, the State noted, There are some other exceptions that I could argue or basis on the rules of evidence that I could argue for the admission of this, but that [, Rule 11-803(E),] I think is [the principal basis]. After Defendant's response to the State's argument, the State proffered several other grounds for the admission of the statement: Rule 11-801(D)(1)(c) NMRA 2002, Rule 11-803(X), Rule 11-804(A)(3) NMRA 2002, and Rule 11-613(B) NMRA 2002. Defendant argues there is insufficient evidence to establish elements one and three beyond a reasonable doubt-that Defendant intended for Allison to shoot and kill Mendez and that Defendant helped or encouraged him to do it. The trial court's determination of these questions will not be disturbed unless its ruling is arbitrary, capricious, or beyond reason. Id. While the prosecutor cannot hide information behind other arms of the State, see Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 437, 115 S.Ct. In New Mexico, [w]hoever commits murder in the first degree is guilty of a capital felony. Section 30-2-1. Family and friends can send flowers and/or light a candle as a loving gesture for their loved one. {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. Id. TermsPrivacyDisclaimerCookiesDo Not Sell My Information, Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select, Stay up-to-date with FindLaw's newsletter for legal professionals. He was a 1959 graduate of Valley High School (ABQ) and attended one year at UNM. . [W]here a jury verdict in a criminal case is supported by substantial evidence, the verdict will not be disturbed on appeal. State v. Anaya, 98 N.M. 211, 212, 647 P.2d 413, 414 (1982). The agreement need not be verbal, but may be shown to exist by acts which demonstrate that the alleged co-conspirator knew of and participated in the scheme. {31} Ortega testified at trial that he and fellow Juaritos Maravilla gang members were asked what they were doing in the Barelas barrio by people standing on a second-floor apartment balcony. {78} Both familial loyalty and fear of retaliation could lead to an inference that Ortiz would not have made the statement to the police unless he believed it to be true. See UJI 14-340 NMRA 2002. As a result, we do not address Defendant's confrontation concerns on appeal. {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. {60} Defendant's final claim is that the prosecutor aggravated the damage in closing by repeatedly referring to Jesus' story and identification as though it were valid evidence properly before the jury for consideration. 1655 La Fonda Dr Las Cruces, NM 88001-3904 Directions. 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. State v. Ross, 1996-NMSC-031, 122 N.M. 15, 20, 919 P.2d 1080, 1085. 4. He earned his wings too soon on May 4, 2021. You can view 1 entry, complete with personal details, location history, phone numbers, relatives and locations for Caitlyn Trujillo. 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. He is a Taos High School graduate of (1998). $3895 . {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. He was shooting, and these guys over here took the gun away from his hands and started shooting at me and Jesus. 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. 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. Chris, you will be greatly missed by all of us.All American Towing will live on, your sons will carry the chains from here so fly high with the Angels until we meet again! The Court stated that [t]he attempt to disarm [d]efendant, the elapse of time between the initial random shooting and the shot fired during the struggle, the apparent change in [d]efendant's intent when he stopped the random shooting and returned to his house, all lead us to conclude there was no evidence that [d]efendant's initial depraved-mind action caused the victim's death. Id. As a result, the prosecutor played the tape of an interview between Ortiz and Detective Shawn conducted a few hours after Mendez was killed. He claims that it was improper for the prosecutor to question Detective Shawn regarding his identification of the shooters. Nearly 24% of New Mexicans rely on SNAP, the highest rate in the . The agreement may be established by circumstantial evidence. The State responds to this argument by claiming that the prosecutor went to great pains to neutralize any bad feelings the jurors may have had about gangs and repeatedly cautioned the jury to judge the case only on its facts. At trial, the judge ruled that the State could introduce evidence relating to gang names and affiliation, but limited the scope and the purpose of the testimony so that it would only be admissible insofar as it's probative of motive, state of mind, intent, and those sorts of things. On direct examination, Ortiz testified that he grew up in Barelas and was basically born and raised in the gang. 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. Chris Trujillo has been working as a Program Analyst at Los Alamos National laboratory for . 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. Nevertheless, the State put forth no evidence from which the jury could infer that any of the shots from any shooter were directed at or hit any building, nor did it cite to any in its briefing to this Court. Christopher Trujillo . We respectfully believe this conclusion is unfounded. He was born and raised in Bernal, N.M., to Ted Trujillo and LuAnna Bustamante. 2. When the person in the best position to judge a witness's candor feels that the witness was being less than truthful, I am uncomfortable holding that the witness's statement bears circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness. {42} Defendant also claims that his attorney failed to complete his interview with Ortega. Email. 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. 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). Public Records & Background Search Christopher David Trujillo, age 60, Denver, CO Background Check She was born to Santiago Miranda and Magdalena Sanchez on February 25, 1928, in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The defendant helped, encouraged or caused the crime to be committed. Click a location below to find Christopher more easily. The State also presented evidence that there was a verbal exchange between Allison, Defendant and Mendez and that some gang identification prompted the shooting. Accordingly, we hold that serious youthful offenders convicted of first-degree murder shall be allowed to invoke this Court's mandatory jurisdiction under Article VI, Section 2 of the New Mexico Constitution and Rule 12-102(A)(1). . We vacate Defendant's conviction for conspiracy to commit depraved-mind murder and 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). In this case the State appears to me to rely on this rule in a way the Court of Appeals rejected as contrary to its purpose. According to Ortiz's statement, after Defendant resisted Allison's request for the gun, Defendant told the four down below, You guys think I'm joking, and began shooting. {30} In State v. Baca, 1997-NMSC-059, 15, 124 N.M. 333, 950 P.2d 776, we concluded that in order to find the defendant guilty as an accessory to first-degree depraved-mind murder the State was required to show, either through direct or circumstantial evidence, that [the principal] committed an act greatly dangerous to the lives of others indicating a depraved mind without regard for human life and also that [the accomplice] helped, encouraged or caused [the principal's] act, intending that the crime occur. Id. In those cases the defendants were not challenging their sentences as violations of the constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, but rather were claiming that their sentences were illegal as not authorized under the applicable statute. Find 80 people named Chris Trujillo along with free Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok search on PeekYou - true people search. 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. See State v. Sanchez, 112 N.M. 59, 65, 811 P.2d 92, 98 (Ct.App.1991) (In ruling upon the admissibility of the statement the trial court does not determine the ultimate questions of the declarant's credibility; instead, this is the province of the jury); see also UJI 14-5020 NMRA 2002. The jury had testimony from two other eyewitnesses, Ortiz and Ortega, that support its findings of guilt. 2052). Christopher Trujillo - Technical Coordinator - Region 9 Education Cooperative | LinkedIn Christopher Trujillo State of New Mexico - Region 9 Education Cooperative Technical Coordinator. 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. 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. For example, the prosecutor asked: Q. See Sutphin, 107 N.M. at 131, 753 P.2d at 1319. In New Mexico the doctrine of cumulative error is strictly applied. Stills, 1998-NMSC-009, 51, 125 N.M. 66, 957 P.2d 51 (quoting State v. Martin, 101 N.M. 595, 601, 686 P.2d 937, 943 (1984)). However, the court then released the two men, unsure of its authority to keep holding them in detention. See State v. Salgado, 1999-NMSC-008, 5-11, 126 N.M. 691, 974 P.2d 661; see also State v. Beachum, 83 N.M. 526, 527, 494 P.2d 188, 189 (Ct.App.1972) (A decision of the trial court will be upheld if it is right for any reason.). Defendant objected to the tape being played to the jury, claiming that this was improper impeachment and inadmissible hearsay under Rules 11-613(B), 11-803(E), 11-801(D)(1)(c), 11-804(A)(3), and 11-803(X) NMRA 2002. I do believe it's appropriate to allow that. Dec. 20, 2020: An open letter to my school family. Detective Shawn's frustration that Ortiz was hiding the identity of the shooters is understandable. STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Chris TRUJILLO, Defendant-Appellant. {81} In response to these arguments, the trial court initially indicated that the statement was admissible as a combination of Rule 11-801(D)(1)(c) and 11-803(E). He also testified that he was unaware at the time of the interview that Ortiz and Allison were cousins. He earned his wings too soon on May 4, 2021. Chris Trujillo Lead IT Specialist at NNMC Santa Fe County, New Mexico, United States 73 followers 70 connections Join to view profile Northern New Mexico College Northern New Mexico. Select the best result to find their address, phone number, relatives, and public records. I publish daily videos playing Slots in casinos all over the country, showing millions of fans how to have a great time using an entertainment budget! Christopher Eric Trujillo was born on month day 1966, at birth place, New Mexico. Search Inmate Profiles (MOST POPULAR) . Defendant in this case was sentenced to thirty years of imprisonment, with the judge explicitly providing that he be eligible for good time credit. 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. I think you are stuck with the strategy there. 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. Court & Arrest Records He earned his wings too soon on May 4, 2021. Furthermore, both Ortiz and Ortega indicated that the shooting was the result of a verbal conflict between competing gang members. New Mexico Counties Filter by filled date. Attended New Mexico State University in Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA in (1998-2000). Trujillo v. Sullivan, 815 F.2d 597, 613 (10th Cir.1987). RESET. Q. {14} At trial, the State called Ortiz as an eyewitness to testify regarding the details of the shooting. Defendant argues that Javier, presumably, had long since turned and run, and in all likelihood had already been hit by the fatal bullet when Defendant began shooting. I therefore also concur in parts IV, VIII, IX and XI. Either out of fear of gang retaliation or out of familial loyalty to Allison, Ortiz had every motive to be less than candid with the police. Defendant's reliance on these cases is misplaced. {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. I'm a Content Strategist focused on Information Architecture and Digital Distribution Design. Rule 11-803(X) allows hearsay statements to be admitted if not specifically covered by any other hearsay exception so long as there are equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness and the court determines that: (1)the statement is offered as evidence of a material fact; (2)the statement is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence which the proponent can procure through reasonable efforts; and. Email. He also identified Defendant as one of the shooters from a photo lineup performed by Detective Shawn and again positively identified Defendant as one of the shooters at trial. Furthermore, it is the policy of this Court to construe its rules liberally so that causes on appeal may be determined on their merits. The essence of the dissent's argument on this point is that while one could reason that Ortiz would not have implicated a family member unless he believed it to be true, equally one could reason that he had a motive to shift the blame from his cousin to Defendant because of familial loyalty, fear of retaliation, and his presumed belief that his cousin would be less culpable. 3375, 87 L.Ed.2d 481 (1985)). Show on Map . 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. We will review the memorials and decide if they should be merged. See Danzer v. Prof'l Insurors, Inc., 101 N.M. 178, 180, 679 P.2d 1276, 1278 (1984); see also Govich v. N. Am. The trial judge denied both motions and made the following finding: First of all, I don't think very many jurors heard it. We affirm Defendant's convictions for first-degree depraved-mind murder and conspiracy to commit aggravated battery. Click a location below to find Christopher more easily. Exercising this discretion, the trial court sentenced Defendant to a term of THIRTY (30) YEARS, BUT NOT LIFE for his first-degree murder conviction. We also note that in a recent opinion this Court unanimously concluded that the district court, under the same exact facts, did not abuse its discretion by admitting Ortiz's prior statement under Rule 11-803(X). She is passionate about finding creative solutions to unconventional problems.<br><br>Carolina thrives in a highly dynamic work environment, by being adaptable and leveraging her technical and managerial skills. 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. However, Ortiz apparently could not recall more specific details of the shooting, including who fired the gun. Chris received a Bachelor of Arts degree from New Mexico Highlands University. 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. {25} In order to convict Defendant of first-degree depraved-mind murder as a principal, the state had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements of the crime: (1)The defendant discharged a firearm several times from the balcony of an apartment dwelling; (2)The defendant's act caused the death of Javier Mendez; (3)The act of the defendant was greatly dangerous to the lives of others, indicating a depraved mind without regard for human life; (4)The defendant knew that his act was greatly dangerous to the lives of others; (5)This happened in New Mexico on or about the 3rd day of July, 1997. {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. Click a location below to find Christopher more easily. Inmate Profiles . Christopher John Trujillo was born on March 30, 1991. An autopsy report shows Gustavo Surez, a 21-year-old American, was shot 12 times after he failed to stop while being chased by Mexican soldiers, who opened fired after he crashed. The second reference came in the middle of his argument about the consistent statements of Ortega and Ortiz: You'd expect two completely different stories if we believe this theory that everyone in gangs lies. Family and friends must say goodbye to their beloved Christopher Patrick Trujillo (Ranchos de Taos, New Mexico), who passed away at the age of 37, on August 14, 2017. [A] non-jurisdictional claim not raised in the lower court is not properly reviewable on appeal. State v. Burdex, 100 N.M. 197, 201, 668 P.2d 313, 317 (Ct.App.1983) (finding defendant's constitutional claim of cruel and unusual punishment was not asserted at the trial court and was therefore not properly preserved for appeal because such a claim is non-jurisdictional).4 We therefore review Defendant's claim for fundamental error. {83} In this case, the State initially offered the testimony under Rule 11-803(E) (recorded recollection), and that was the focus of most of its discussion. {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). This is where Chris became interested in law enforcement. {24} Depraved-mind murder is the killing of one human being by another without lawful justification or excuse, by any of the means with which death may be caused by any act greatly dangerous to the lives of others, indicating a depraved mind regardless of human life. Section 30-2-1(A)(3). She was driving a purple 2005 Chevrolet Cavalier with New Mexico plate number JFZ-534. The email address cannot be subscribed. {45} Defendant also argues that defense counsel failed to object to prejudicial hearsay statements and elicited highly prejudicial evidence against his own client. On the night of the shooting, Ortega identified Defendant as one of the shooters from a photo array shown to him by Detective Shawn.