Attorneys in 2019 murder case argue over emails, scheduling, professional conduct
LAS CRUCES - The defense wanted the prosecutor excluded from the case. The prosecutor accused the defense of misleading the court.
During a testy hearing Tuesday, defense attorney Jeff Lahann and prosecutor Linzui Vergara exchanged accusations over unscheduled interviews, misleading statements, and professional conduct in a murder case from 2019.
"I don't think the prosecution has any grasp on this case," Lahann said at one point during the hearing. His statement was met with a firm rebuttal from Vergara.
"He is also unfamiliar with what's been going on in this case," she said.
The Jan. 25 hearing was the latest development in the murder case of 24-year-old Adam Alexander Torres.
Original coverage: Details emerge in deadly shooting on Locust Street
According to police, Torres shot and killed Rogelio Alexander Baeza just after 1 a.m. Friday, June 28, 2019. Police also believe that Torres shot but did not kill another man who was running away at the time of the shooting. In an affidavit, police said that Torres shot at Baeza and the other man outside of Halo's Ultra Lounge after Torres messaged Baeza.
"Wait till I see you homie or anyone I know I got a number on your head since you wanna talk loud," read a message that Torres allegedly sent to Baeza implying there was a bounty on Baeza's life.
Police said Torres wanted to kill Baeza because Baeza had beaten up a mutual acquaintance. Police also said that a witness claimed Torres owed Baeza $2,000.
A family member of Baeza described him as the life of the party. Baeza is survived by his father, multiple siblings and a child.
Torres was arrested on the evening of the murder according to court records. He was charged with first-degree murder and attempted first-degree murder.
Shortly after his arrest, a judge ruled Torres would not be granted a bond and would be held in jail until his trial. For over two and half years, Torres has been in the Doña Ana County Detention Center waiting for a resolution. His defense attorney, Lahann, said that the blame for much of that delay lay at the feet of prosecutors.
Scheduling snafu
In a motion requesting a judge to exclude prosecutors' witnesses at trial, Lahann said that just a handful of witnesses had been made available by the state for interviews with him. Lahann said that communication between him and the case's lead prosecutor, Vergara, broke down last November when he attempted to set up interviews.
Lahann said that he provided Vergara with access to his calendar to directly schedule interviews before the deadline in January. Since then, Lahann said no interviews had been set up.
"You can just look on my calendar, find the open spot and plug it in and it would be locked in on my calendar," Lahann said.
Because this case involves murder charges and will be automatically appealed if Torres is convicted, Lahann said it was critical for him to do his due diligence and interview every witness.
"Every decision that I make in this case, everything that I do in this case will be scrutinized and double guessed. And if I did not interview every single witness before the trial, I would be committing ineffective assistance," he said. "I don't think anyone would disagree with that."
Vergara said that Lahann's interview requests were unclear and that he was misleading the court when he said that prosecutors hadn't tried to set up interviews. She specifically slammed Lahann for not being more specific when requesting whom to interview.
"I can go back to the notes and all however many pages of notes there are in this murder… and search for that. But that is not the state's responsibility," she said. "In that case, I might as well do his job for him."
Vergara also pushed back against statements made by Lahann regarding her level of experience.
"The fact is that defense is treating the state like a secretary and putting the burden on the state to remind him to do his (interviews) and to do his job," Vergara said.
Both Vergara and Lahann told 3rd Judicial District Judge Conrad Perea they would not agree to a continuance and that they should proceed to trial next week.
"I disagree with both (parties)," Perea said. "We are not ready to proceed to trial, and we shall have a continuance. We cannot allow this case to go to trial."
Citing New Mexico case law, Perea ruled that fault belonged to the prosecution but emphasized that Vergara was not personally to blame. He ordered the creation of a firm schedule and deadline. He said that all interviews and exhibits must be submitted and reviewed by June 1.
While he left the door open on witness exclusion, Perea said that he would not disqualify Vergara from prosecuting the case.
"Please get to know each other," Perea said.
At the outset of the hearing, Torres requested that a review of his bond be considered. Lahann said that he would pursue a bond reduction soon.
Justin Garcia is a public safety reporter for the Las Cruces Sun-News. He can be reached at JEGarcia@lcsun-news.com or on Twitter @Just516garc.
Others are reading:
Three years ago, Las Cruces promised to hire an inspector general. It hasn't happened.
Doña Ana County Sheriff faces complaints over promotions
Las Cruces Sun-News newsletter sheds light on reporting process
This article originally appeared on Las Cruces Sun-News: Attorneys in 2019 murder case argue before judge moves trial to later in the year
