Tuesday, January 8, 2013
AG Joined in Fight Against Double Dipping/Human Trafficking
The Attorney General’s Office is pleased to hear about proposed legislation to end the practice of “double dipping” for expenses by New Mexico legislators and encouraged to see that the City of Albuquerque’s is promising action against human trafficking. The AGO has been advocating for both ideas for some time and we welcome the support now being shown by State Representative Nate Gentry and Albuquerque Mayor Richard Berry.
When we found that no laws had been violated in our investigation into former State Representative Ray Begaye’s travel reimbursements for various trips taken by him involving Legislative business, simply put---it was because there are currently no laws that expressly prohibit the practice. AG King believes that is unacceptable and in a letter urged the state Legislative Council to address the problem. Our letter stated:
“We strongly recommend Legislative Council adopt and your office implement a new explicit policy regarding reimbursement for Legislators when conducting officially sanctioned Legislative business trips. We suggest they be limited to receiving expense reimbursement from only a single entity for any particular trip. A Legislator should choose to accept only per diem, mileage, and expenses from the State or solely from an outside source. The supplementation or duplication of public funds reimbursement from private organizations should not be allowed due to the appearance of “double-dipping”.”
Representative Gentry has announced he plans to tackle the problem through legislation. We are enthusiastic that our recommendation has begun the process of addressing the issue.
And Albuquerque Mayor Richard Berry has reportedly begun an initiative to step up the city’s battle against human trafficking. Again, we applaud the city’s efforts as we continue our own statewide anti-human trafficking actions. After working to get a state law on the books making human trafficking a felony in New Mexico, AG King has been following up with many training sessions across the state to familiarize the public, prosecutors, and law enforcement with all aspects of combatting what is termed as “modern day slavery.” In 2008 the Attorney General was summoned to Geneva, Switzerland by the United Nations Committee on Rights of the Child as part of a U.S. delegation that would address issues such as trafficking of children and child pornography. The CRC had heard of AG King’s successful efforts to get a new state law passed that makes human trafficking a felony. Committee members were also aware of the AGO’s collaboration with the Mexican state of Chihuahua to aggressively combat the sale of children and adults in the black market. AG King has recently been asked to update the CRC on what New Mexico has done since then to combat human trafficking.
Incidentally, January is designated as National Slavery and Human Trafficking Prevention Month.
Thursday, December 6, 2012
AG King on Vigil-Giron Case Delays
Attorney General Gary King responds to criticisms involving delays and the dismissal of the criminal case against former Secretary of State Vigil-Giron:
A recent newspaper editorial opined about the delays in the corruption trial of Rebecca Vigil-Giron which resulted in dismissal of the case against her on "speedy trial" grounds. The editorial myopically blames the AG for this disappointing outcome.
Here is the analysis the newspaper missed: First, the editorial notes that eight judges have presided over this case. It failed to note that three of those assigned judges refused to hear the case. Two of the judges were excused by the Defendants (including Ms. Vigil-Giron, who excused Judge Whitaker). The AG was responsible for excusing one judge, which resulted in a delay of only six days. Judge Murdoch, the judge who presided for the longest period, had to resign from office. This resignation had a significant negative impact on the case. The trial was delayed from July until October, 2011 while the process waited for Governor Martinez to appoint a new judge to the position. That judge was required to recuse himself because of a prior relationship with one of the defense attorneys. More delay, none caused by the AG, nor was it preventable by the AG.
Second, the editorial points out delays were caused by the excessive number of pre-trial motions filed by the defense. The editorial failed to note that Judge Murdoch did not to set a hearing on the most dispositive of those motions until March, 2011, a period of 18 months after the motions were filed (nearly half of the entire delay in the case). We requested, and got two trial dates (7/2010 and 1/2011), both of which were cancelled at the co-defendants' requests and over our objections. The AG’s office was fully prepared to try the case on these dates. Our office continues in the contention that there is sufficient evidence against Ms. Vigil-Giron that if such evidence were submitted to a jury of her peers it would prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she committed the crimes that were charged.
Third, the editorial notes with apparent derision that "The New Mexico Attorney General's Office fought to remain as prosecutor.” Darn tootin' we did! The failure in analysis here is the crux of the editorial board’s refusal to analyze or acknowledge the unique nature of all AG offices when they prosecute on behalf of the state. It is not unusual nor improper for an AG's office to give civil advice to an agency through its Civil Division and also have the capacity to prosecute wrongdoing by a public official from the same agency. A prosecutor has a duty not to cut and run just because the defense raises a procedural question as a trial tactic. It should be made clear that the trial judge made specific findings that there was no bias or political motive by the AG that led to the indictments and trial of Ms. Vigil-Giron and her three co-defendants. Still, the judge ordered that the trial be transferred to an independent prosecutor because of a "shadow" remaining over this hotly contested issue. We could have appealed the decision, however, it would have added 1-2 years to the progress of the trial. Unfortunately, further delay occurred because the law in New Mexico does not have any direct method for the AG to hire an independent prosecutor and the defendants objected to my office having anything to do with hiring one. In any event, the case was at that time successfully transferred to the Second District Attorney who retained an independent prosecutor.
Even though detractors of the Attorney General’s Office have capitalized on uninformed criticism and innuendo to place the responsibility for all the delay in this case on the AG, it is clear that there were numerous factors that led to the delays. If we intend to improve the outcomes in corruption cases it is important to first be honest with ourselves and the public so we can address the root causes that result in delay that may keep the defendant and the people of the state from having their “day in court.”
A recent newspaper editorial opined about the delays in the corruption trial of Rebecca Vigil-Giron which resulted in dismissal of the case against her on "speedy trial" grounds. The editorial myopically blames the AG for this disappointing outcome.
Here is the analysis the newspaper missed: First, the editorial notes that eight judges have presided over this case. It failed to note that three of those assigned judges refused to hear the case. Two of the judges were excused by the Defendants (including Ms. Vigil-Giron, who excused Judge Whitaker). The AG was responsible for excusing one judge, which resulted in a delay of only six days. Judge Murdoch, the judge who presided for the longest period, had to resign from office. This resignation had a significant negative impact on the case. The trial was delayed from July until October, 2011 while the process waited for Governor Martinez to appoint a new judge to the position. That judge was required to recuse himself because of a prior relationship with one of the defense attorneys. More delay, none caused by the AG, nor was it preventable by the AG.
Second, the editorial points out delays were caused by the excessive number of pre-trial motions filed by the defense. The editorial failed to note that Judge Murdoch did not to set a hearing on the most dispositive of those motions until March, 2011, a period of 18 months after the motions were filed (nearly half of the entire delay in the case). We requested, and got two trial dates (7/2010 and 1/2011), both of which were cancelled at the co-defendants' requests and over our objections. The AG’s office was fully prepared to try the case on these dates. Our office continues in the contention that there is sufficient evidence against Ms. Vigil-Giron that if such evidence were submitted to a jury of her peers it would prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she committed the crimes that were charged.
Third, the editorial notes with apparent derision that "The New Mexico Attorney General's Office fought to remain as prosecutor.” Darn tootin' we did! The failure in analysis here is the crux of the editorial board’s refusal to analyze or acknowledge the unique nature of all AG offices when they prosecute on behalf of the state. It is not unusual nor improper for an AG's office to give civil advice to an agency through its Civil Division and also have the capacity to prosecute wrongdoing by a public official from the same agency. A prosecutor has a duty not to cut and run just because the defense raises a procedural question as a trial tactic. It should be made clear that the trial judge made specific findings that there was no bias or political motive by the AG that led to the indictments and trial of Ms. Vigil-Giron and her three co-defendants. Still, the judge ordered that the trial be transferred to an independent prosecutor because of a "shadow" remaining over this hotly contested issue. We could have appealed the decision, however, it would have added 1-2 years to the progress of the trial. Unfortunately, further delay occurred because the law in New Mexico does not have any direct method for the AG to hire an independent prosecutor and the defendants objected to my office having anything to do with hiring one. In any event, the case was at that time successfully transferred to the Second District Attorney who retained an independent prosecutor.
Even though detractors of the Attorney General’s Office have capitalized on uninformed criticism and innuendo to place the responsibility for all the delay in this case on the AG, it is clear that there were numerous factors that led to the delays. If we intend to improve the outcomes in corruption cases it is important to first be honest with ourselves and the public so we can address the root causes that result in delay that may keep the defendant and the people of the state from having their “day in court.”
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Kudos for Anti-Human Trafficking Policies
The Albuquerque City Council should be congratulated for its efforts this week to address human trafficking and other crimes at the city's strip clubs. Attorney General King has long made anti-human trafficking efforts a hallmark of his administration...the city's action can only assist in the campaign against what is aptly referred to as Modern Day Slavery. This is a positive step in the right direction and hopefully the city will expand this type of vigilance with other businesses and industries that could potentially be involved in human trafficking.
Friday, October 12, 2012
AG Takes Anti-Voter Suppression Steps
Recent allegations of voter suppression tactics in the Albuquerque area prompted Attorney General King to initiate an investigation this week. The AG is committed to fair elections in our state and is very concerned about complaints that there are insidious attempts being made to turn away legitimate voters from election polling places in November. AG King was copied on a letter (below) this week to Secretary of State Dianna Duran from a coalition of non-partisan organizations that says, “We are concerned that without corrective action on your part this and other incorrect information may result in disruption, delay and potentially disenfranchisement on Election Day.” The letter goes on to request that the Secretary investigate and take steps to correct misinformation provided by recent voter “challenger training” by a Sandoval County GOP operative. In an effort to address the misinformation recently disseminated about New Mexico voting laws, Attorney General Gary King today is publishing certain excerpts of law concerning voter identification and provisional voting. Interestingly, despite a call from the AG for the Governor and Secretary of State to repudiate voter suppression attempts, both have remained largely silent on the matter.
Meanwhile, in other elections-related news, a lawsuit was filed Thursday, naming the Secretary of State, in an effort to restore straight party ticket voting in New Mexico. An Associated Press report states, “The lawsuit asks the state Supreme Court to order election officials to change ballots to allow voters in coming days and weeks to make a single mark to support a political party’s entire slate of candidates...Her office has contended that state law doesn’t specifically authorize the straight ticket option, which has been a long-standing feature of New Mexico ballots until this general election...The lawsuit includes sworn statements from registered voters saying the lack of a straight party ticket option limited their ballot options...One Santa Fe man said in his affidavit that a sample ballot in this year’s election “looks like a straight party option when it is not.” State law once required lever-type voting machines to offer the straight ticket option.”
Meanwhile, in other elections-related news, a lawsuit was filed Thursday, naming the Secretary of State, in an effort to restore straight party ticket voting in New Mexico. An Associated Press report states, “The lawsuit asks the state Supreme Court to order election officials to change ballots to allow voters in coming days and weeks to make a single mark to support a political party’s entire slate of candidates...Her office has contended that state law doesn’t specifically authorize the straight ticket option, which has been a long-standing feature of New Mexico ballots until this general election...The lawsuit includes sworn statements from registered voters saying the lack of a straight party ticket option limited their ballot options...One Santa Fe man said in his affidavit that a sample ballot in this year’s election “looks like a straight party option when it is not.” State law once required lever-type voting machines to offer the straight ticket option.”
Friday, September 28, 2012
Predatory Loan Shark Scuttled
Lots of good news for New Mexicans this week. Undoubtedly, the highlight was the huge win for Attorney General King’s lawsuit against predatory lender FastBucks, LLC. Initial estimates put restitution for victims at $10,000,000...yes, ten million dollars! In addition to that, the company, with offices around New Mexico, was ordered to stop making illegal loans and will be unable to enforce certain current loans that are not in compliance with state law.
It was a big night in Hobbs Thursday night as about 50 people from Southeast New Mexico attended a Train the Trainer anti-meth session conducted by AG King’s office. The training project is aimed at raising awareness of the meth problem with community members and teaching them how to conduct their own local presentations on the dangers of methamphetamine abuse.
And today saw another big legal win for AG King’s office. The AG charged an Arizona firm with illegally offering and providing unauthorized immigration services in New Mexico. Centro Ayuda primarily targeted Spanish-speaking customers in the Albuquerque area offering them immigration services, including preparation of a Deferred Action application, a recently announced federal immigration program. Under a deferred action, certain undocumented immigrants who meet specific requirements are able to apply for an employment authorization for a period of two years. Centro Ayuda has agreed to close its Albuquerque office and dissolve its organization.
Friday, September 21, 2012
AGO Happenings This Week
Congratulations to our Criminal Appeals Division for a successful appeal this week that resulted in a court decision affirming the mandatory use of ignition interlock devices for first time DWI offenders, no matter what the source of their impairment. The Court of Appeals sided with the Attorney General’s Office which argued that the interlock device requirement does not violate either the U.S. or New Mexico constitutions. The case stemmed from the conviction for DWI of a woman in Santa Fe County who was found to have a number of prescription drugs in her system, but no alcohol. She asked that the vehicle interlock requirement be removed in a conditional plea agreement and her request was granted by a Santa Fe District Court. The Court of Appeals decision reverses the lower court’s ruling.
AG King addressed students at Griegos Elementary School in Albuquerque for their observance of national Constitution Day Wednesday. He told the students about how our government works, why it works, and how they can aspire to be a future attorney general, governor, or president. Upon asking one young boy if he knew how the Constitution began the student recited the entire Preamble. AG King, a Constitutional scholar, was duly impressed.
Thursday, August 30, 2012
AG's Role in Paseo/I25 Election Question
Much has been said, and sometimes misreported, about the role the Attorney General’s Office has played in Albuquerque’s election ballot question regarding the proposed Paseo del Norte/I25 interchange construction project.
First, let’s re-establish the facts. On August 16, 2012, the Office issued a legal Opinion that concluded the following: According to the New Mexico Election Code, a municipality can not propose a question on a the statewide election ballot. Included in that conclusion was the statement that, “Nevertheless, a municipality may submit a question to voters of the municipality on a municipal election held on the same day as a general election.”
Then on August 27, 2012, the AGO further advised the Secretary of State that the applicable state statute, while allowing a concurrent city-state election, also requires that: “...although a municipal election may be held concurrently with a general election, the two elections must remain separate and any incompatible provisions, such as voter identification must be independently dealt with...The municipality (City of Albuquerque) is responsible for determining that the concurrent election and any combined actions comply with the requirements of the ordinance or law that governs the municipality’s elections.”
Attorney General King says that it is important for the public to know we are not the kind of lawyers who just say "You can't do that" and leave it. We have been working cooperatively with the Secretary of State, County Clerk and City Clerk and their legal counsel to find the appropriate and defensible way to hold a concurrent election on this issue in November.
Now, here’s the misreporting from an Albuquerque TV station: “The attorney general now says a question to approve money for the Paseo del Norte-Interstate 25 interchange can appear on the November ballot as long as the city follows state election rules...At first the AG's office said the city issue wasn't allowed on a general election ballot, which is limited to county and state issues.” No...the AG has always advised (see above) that a concurrent election is allowed.
But on Wednesday Attorney General Gary King announced it would be OK to add the city question to the ballot as long as the Albuquerque City Council waives the voter ID requirement. No, the AG did not announce anything...the Secretary of State released an attorney-client memo...where we simply reiterated our earlier advice.
The August 16th Opinion and the August 27th memo are posted on the AGo website at: https://sites.google.com/a/nmag.gov/test-nmag/News-Releases.
First, let’s re-establish the facts. On August 16, 2012, the Office issued a legal Opinion that concluded the following: According to the New Mexico Election Code, a municipality can not propose a question on a the statewide election ballot. Included in that conclusion was the statement that, “Nevertheless, a municipality may submit a question to voters of the municipality on a municipal election held on the same day as a general election.”
Then on August 27, 2012, the AGO further advised the Secretary of State that the applicable state statute, while allowing a concurrent city-state election, also requires that: “...although a municipal election may be held concurrently with a general election, the two elections must remain separate and any incompatible provisions, such as voter identification must be independently dealt with...The municipality (City of Albuquerque) is responsible for determining that the concurrent election and any combined actions comply with the requirements of the ordinance or law that governs the municipality’s elections.”
Attorney General King says that it is important for the public to know we are not the kind of lawyers who just say "You can't do that" and leave it. We have been working cooperatively with the Secretary of State, County Clerk and City Clerk and their legal counsel to find the appropriate and defensible way to hold a concurrent election on this issue in November.
Now, here’s the misreporting from an Albuquerque TV station: “The attorney general now says a question to approve money for the Paseo del Norte-Interstate 25 interchange can appear on the November ballot as long as the city follows state election rules...At first the AG's office said the city issue wasn't allowed on a general election ballot, which is limited to county and state issues.” No...the AG has always advised (see above) that a concurrent election is allowed.
But on Wednesday Attorney General Gary King announced it would be OK to add the city question to the ballot as long as the Albuquerque City Council waives the voter ID requirement. No, the AG did not announce anything...the Secretary of State released an attorney-client memo...where we simply reiterated our earlier advice.
The August 16th Opinion and the August 27th memo are posted on the AGo website at: https://sites.google.com/a/nmag.gov/test-nmag/News-Releases.
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
AG: NM Water Floating Away
We never know the worth of water till the well is dry. ~Thomas Fuller, Gnomologia, 1732
Attorney General King staffers this week briefed New Mexico lawmakers on the importance of his lawsuit against the federal government over the illegal transport of Rio Grande water to Texas.
Assistant Attorney General and director of AG King's Water, Environment, & Utilities Division Steve Farris told a group of NM legislators that the water currently flowing south in the Lower Rio Grande is being stolen from our state. The theft affects lawmakers' districts from Las Cruces to Chama.
An account of the legislative hearing, held Monday in T or C, was reported by the Las Cruces Sun News. Click on the link below for the story.
http://www.lcsun-news.com/ci_21410745/lawmakers-wade-into-water-battle?IADID=Search-www.lcsun-news.com-www.lcsun-news.com
Attorney General King staffers this week briefed New Mexico lawmakers on the importance of his lawsuit against the federal government over the illegal transport of Rio Grande water to Texas.
Assistant Attorney General and director of AG King's Water, Environment, & Utilities Division Steve Farris told a group of NM legislators that the water currently flowing south in the Lower Rio Grande is being stolen from our state. The theft affects lawmakers' districts from Las Cruces to Chama.
An account of the legislative hearing, held Monday in T or C, was reported by the Las Cruces Sun News. Click on the link below for the story.
http://www.lcsun-news.com/ci_21410745/lawmakers-wade-into-water-battle?IADID=Search-www.lcsun-news.com-www.lcsun-news.com
Friday, August 10, 2012
Paseo & Voter Cards...AGO Involvement
Two big issues involving the Attorney General’s Office have a lot of people talking. It is important to clarify what the facts are in both issues.
First, the Paseo del Norte/I-25 interchange rebuild project in Albuquerque. I took a call from an upset person today who accused the Attorney General of trying to take away the right of Albuquerque residents to vote on whether they want to approve or shoot down a bond issue that would provide funding for the project. Whoa Nellie! The AG has no such power nor did the office’s advice specifically address this project at all.
Secretary of State Duran asked our office to examine whether it is legal to put a municipal question on a general election ballot. Our attorney was not even informed that the ballot question referred to the Paseo del Norte matter. Our office determined that New Mexico law limits the general election ballot to questions that are “either statewide or countywide in application”...period. Clearly, the AG had no grand designs on subverting the process for funding the Paseo del Norte/I25 Interchange improvement project. AG King has been stuck in that drivetime traffic nightmare himself quite a number of times...why would he want to throw a monkey wrench into something that could help countless Albuquerque area commuters?
Secondly, the issue of the Secretary of State’s postcards to NM voters in danger of losing their place on state voter rolls. Once again, we were asked for legal advice about language contained on the postcards in terms of whether it complied with state and federal voting law requirements. It was our determination that the language would likely pass muster with the U. S. Department of Justice, which is in charge of such things. Keep in mind, NM must be in compliance with the National Voter Registration Act, which is understandably of tantamount importance to AG King. Just as important to the AG is ensuring that there is never any sort of voter suppression at the polls in New Mexico. We believe the Secretary of State shares our goal and duty to help ensure fair elections in our state by making sure nobody cheats.
And that...is the rest of the AGO story.
Wednesday, August 8, 2012
AG Supports Second Amendment Ruling
Attorney General King joined the AGs of several other states in supporting an amicus brief filed to uphold a decision by a Maryland federal judge invalidating a Maryland state law which severely restricted the ability of a law abiding citizen to obtain a concealed carry permit for a handgun. In the decision Woolard v. Sheridan, a Maryland statute requiring residents to have a 'good and substantial reason' for obtaining a concealed carry permit was struck down after the judge found that it violates the Second Amendment.
No such restriction exists in New Mexico law. AG King believes the Second Amendment right of an honest person to bear arms should not be infringed unless there is a compelling reason for the state to take such action.
No such restriction exists in New Mexico law. AG King believes the Second Amendment right of an honest person to bear arms should not be infringed unless there is a compelling reason for the state to take such action.
Friday, July 20, 2012
Federal Campaign Finance Reforms Blocked--New Mexico Efforts Continue
This week the U.S. Senate halted efforts to advance legislation that would require independent groups to disclose the names of contributors who give more than $10,000 to independent groups for use in political campaigns. The measure, known as the DISCLOSE Act, (“Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections”) was drafted in response to the 2010 Citizens United ruling, in which the U.S. Supreme Court said that corporate campaign donations are a form of free speech and cannot be limited by government.
In a letter to the Governor before the last Session of the Legislature, Attorney General King stated: “Many of us are concerned that under current U. S. Supreme Court interpretations, there may be many so-called independent groups, corporations, non profits or others that will seek to expend substantial sums of money to influence elections without making fair disclosure of the sources of their funds. We do not believe that is in the public interest, and we firmly believe that requiring full and fair disclosure of the funding sources for all electioneering materials and expenditures is fully consistent with and authorized by the U. S. Supreme Court in the well known Citizens United decision, as well as other court precedent.”
AG King then proffered legislation that creates campaign disclosure requirements for third parties that campaign for or against political candidates in New Mexico. Unfortunately, the measure did not make it through the legislative process at that time. Not one to give up, the AG will try again in the next Session to enact a good, strong bipartisan supported law requiring disclosure of election campaign contribution funds. Unfortunately, to the detriment of political funding transparency, what AG King predicted about the explosive growth of secret big-money electioneering has already come true in our state.
Thursday, July 19, 2012
Journal Wrong...Again
In its continuing effort to discredit or otherwise misrepresent the work of the New Mexico Attorney General's Office, the Albuquerque Journal today editorialized that AG King should drop any investigation into the Governor's Office like a hot political potato. Unfortunately, the paper either cites incorrect "facts" or simply employs its favorite smear-by-innuendo tactic to make its points.
Let's start at the bottom of the Journal's editorial and work our way up.
The paper states that, "King has a rash of unfinished cases around." Of course, there is no mention of which cases, or more importantly, why they are still unresolved. I'll take a wild guess and say that one of those the Journal is referring to is the Region 3 Housing Authority case...first indicted in 2009. Between the two separate cases there have been more than 20 Defense motions, including two motions to disqualify the AGO. Consequently, two appellate court decisions upheld the AG's right to prosecute the cases. Those delays should rightly be attributed to the Defense...not the Attorney General. In fact, we have been ready take the cases to trial since 2009. But somehow the Journal is determined to continue to say that these and other cases are 'languishing' because of something the AGO is or isn't doing. Apparently the real reasons do not fit the script though.
Next up, the Journal's contention that AG King's
"conflict of interest" has led to major delays and "seriously jeopardized" the corruption case against Rebecca Vigil-Giron. Nowhere does the Journal mention that the judge in this case expressly and unequivocally said in his official order that:
In non-legalese...the judge could not find any real conflicts. But once again, the Journal refuses to rely on factual information, in this case, from the judge himself.
Now, to the meat of the Journal's visceral reaction to the Attorney General looking into possible wrongdoing in the Governor's Office. The paper once again trots out the conflict horse saying AG King, "can't see the conflict-of-interest forest for the political-advantage trees." I am not sure if it was a mistake, but the editorial then states that it is indeed the Attorney General's job to, "represent the state and investigate allegations about public agencies and actions of public employees." And in the same breath the editorial says if the AG does deign to investigate, he opens himself up to more criticism than usual (ostensibly from the Journal) for being politically motivated because of his political plans.
But saving the best for last, the Journal posits that AG King should finish investigating and prosecuting other cases and not bother the Governor, i.e.,"...leave any investigation of the incumbent's administration to others." Seriously? If memory serves, the Journal frothily advocated investigating former Governor Bill Richardson for any perceived infraction the paper could gin up. But not this time, not by this Attorney General anyway.
Let's start at the bottom of the Journal's editorial and work our way up.
The paper states that, "King has a rash of unfinished cases around." Of course, there is no mention of which cases, or more importantly, why they are still unresolved. I'll take a wild guess and say that one of those the Journal is referring to is the Region 3 Housing Authority case...first indicted in 2009. Between the two separate cases there have been more than 20 Defense motions, including two motions to disqualify the AGO. Consequently, two appellate court decisions upheld the AG's right to prosecute the cases. Those delays should rightly be attributed to the Defense...not the Attorney General. In fact, we have been ready take the cases to trial since 2009. But somehow the Journal is determined to continue to say that these and other cases are 'languishing' because of something the AGO is or isn't doing. Apparently the real reasons do not fit the script though.
Next up, the Journal's contention that AG King's
"conflict of interest" has led to major delays and "seriously jeopardized" the corruption case against Rebecca Vigil-Giron. Nowhere does the Journal mention that the judge in this case expressly and unequivocally said in his official order that:
- The Court finds no intentional wrongdoing on the part of the Office of Attorney General;
- The Court finds that the prosecution was not motivated by vindictiveness or with a political purpose;
In non-legalese...the judge could not find any real conflicts. But once again, the Journal refuses to rely on factual information, in this case, from the judge himself.
Now, to the meat of the Journal's visceral reaction to the Attorney General looking into possible wrongdoing in the Governor's Office. The paper once again trots out the conflict horse saying AG King, "can't see the conflict-of-interest forest for the political-advantage trees." I am not sure if it was a mistake, but the editorial then states that it is indeed the Attorney General's job to, "represent the state and investigate allegations about public agencies and actions of public employees." And in the same breath the editorial says if the AG does deign to investigate, he opens himself up to more criticism than usual (ostensibly from the Journal) for being politically motivated because of his political plans.
But saving the best for last, the Journal posits that AG King should finish investigating and prosecuting other cases and not bother the Governor, i.e.,"...leave any investigation of the incumbent's administration to others." Seriously? If memory serves, the Journal frothily advocated investigating former Governor Bill Richardson for any perceived infraction the paper could gin up. But not this time, not by this Attorney General anyway.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
AG Helping New Mexicans Avoid Foreclosure
Holding on to the American dream of homeownership has become a nightmare for many New Mexicans. AG King is trying to do something to alleviate the economic and personal stress that comes with facing the specter of foreclosure. It is called the Homeownership Preservation Program.
It’s not sexy or particularly newsworthy apparently, but the program certainly will positively affect the lives of a good many of our state’s homeowners who find themselves in the seemingly hopeless position of losing their homes.
The Attorney General’s Office issued a Request For Proposals (RFP) last week to solicit contractors capable of providing a number of remedial services recently funded by a legal settlement reached with top national banks for foreclosure abuses and fraudulent practices. The settlement allocated millions in potential homeowner relief; approximately 11 million dollars over the next three years will come directly to New Mexico for Attorney General King’s program.
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
No Reason for "Rule of Reason" in Public Records Requests
Last week’s NM Supreme Court Opinion to narrow the use of executive privilege to deny public records requests is being hailed by Attorney General King as a welcome clarification of the privilege’s application in the Inspection of Public Records Act context. The AG is responsible for enforcing IPRA and a discussion of the effect of the Court’s ruling will be included in the published update of the law that the AG’s office provides to public bodies, including state agencies.
The Court’s opinion also concluded that release of public records cannot be denied by government officials who claim that disclosure is protected by the “rule of reason,” a court-created doctrine under a prior version of IPRA. Essentially, the “rule of reason” was used to claim that the release of certain documents was not in the public interest, even if they were not specifically exempted by IPRA. The NM Legislature has since amended IPRA to enumerate specific exceptions to disclosure; exceptions that can be granted only if they fall under the exclusionary provisions in IPRA or if they are otherwise exempt from disclosure by provisions of law. In simple terms, the Court says there is no longer any reason for the “rule of reason” regarding release of public documents.
AG King says this case makes it clear that any exemptions to IPRA lie squarely within the purview of the Legislature.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
DA Appoints AG Special Prosecutor in Horse Case
R. David Pederson, General Counsel for Attorney General Gary King’s office, has been appointed as a Special Prosecutor by 13th Judicial District Attorney Lemuel Martinez to aid in the prosecution of Animal Cruelty and Livestock violations for the Dennis Chavez case from Valencia County. The NM Attorney General’s Office is providing resources to obtain necessary expert witness assistance to facilitate the presentation of this important criminal matter. The collaboration between State and local law enforcement agencies greatly improves the successful resolution of these cases. This is part of the commitment of AG King to the on-going efforts of his statewide Animal Cruelty Task Force.
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Horses Get Help from AG
Attorney General King is pleased with the response by law enforcement and prosecutors to the plight of some of the horses at the Southwest Livestock Auction pens in Valencia County. The local district attorney has charged the auction’s owner with animal cruelty and other offenses. As promised, AG King provided legal help from his office to get to this point. Now, AG King is providing the primary funding to help pay for the prosecution of charges brought by the district attorney. The Attorney General says he recognized that the DA had limited resources so he found money in his office’s budget to help bolster those resources. AG King will continue to help in this particular matter and is committed to helping ensure the health and welfare of horses across New Mexico.
Monday, May 21, 2012
Keep the Violence Against Women Act
As a state legislator, I sponsored the Family Violence Protection Act, which has been the primary tool for fighting domestic violence in New Mexico since 1987. As NM Attorney General, I joined my colleagues from the National Association of Attorneys General in sending a letter to Congress asking our nation’s lawmakers to reauthorize the federal Violence Against Women Act, first passed in 1994. The American Bar Association is also urging Congress to approve the continuation of the Act. Protecting women and families from violence and abuse is clearly an ongoing concern for our state and the nation.
A measure that would reauthorize VAWA was recently approved by the Senate with broad bipartisan support. However, the House introduced its own version of VAWA reauthorization as H.R. 4970. This bill contains several provisions that would make it more difficult for immigrant victims of domestic violence to gain protections than current law provides. That bill was amended in committee on May 8, 2012, but because of the proposed rollbacks in victim protections I can not support this version.
Reauthorization is so important because it provides for continuation of vital programs addressing violence against women. To date, the policies and programs supported and inspired by the Act have been credited with providing lifesaving assistance to hundreds of thousands of victims.
In our letter to Congress earlier this year, Attorneys General pointed out to members a U.S. Department of Justice study that showed VAWA has transformed the response to domestic violence at the local, state and federal level. Its successes have been dramatic, with the annual incidence of domestic violence falling by more than 50 percent.
According to the American Bar Association, VAWA has been the single most effective federal effort to respond to the epidemic of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking in this country. The act has ensured that legal and social services are available to survivors, and that law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, attorneys and advocates are well-trained and equipped with cutting-edge resources to effectively address these crimes in their own communities.
As law enforcement leaders, we recognize the importance of the Violence Against Women Act because domestic violence very clearly remains a serious problem, not only in New Mexico, but throughout the nation. One in four women in America experience domestic violence or sexual assault, and three women die at the hands of abusive husbands or partners every day.
In addition, human trafficking remains a related pervasive problem. The U.S. government estimates that 100,000 victims of human trafficking live in the United States today, and that as many as 17,500 foreign-born victims are illegally trafficked in from abroad each year. Many, if not most, of these victims are women who are coerced into prostitution and/or other forms of sexual exploitation, and forced labor. We need every available tool to fight these crimes.
Congress reauthorized VAWA twice in the last decade, New Mexico and the nation have a vested interest in seeing that it does so again. I strongly encourage you to contact your Congressional delegation and ask them to support the bipartisan Senate version for reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.
Gary K. King
New Mexico Attorney General
A measure that would reauthorize VAWA was recently approved by the Senate with broad bipartisan support. However, the House introduced its own version of VAWA reauthorization as H.R. 4970. This bill contains several provisions that would make it more difficult for immigrant victims of domestic violence to gain protections than current law provides. That bill was amended in committee on May 8, 2012, but because of the proposed rollbacks in victim protections I can not support this version.
Reauthorization is so important because it provides for continuation of vital programs addressing violence against women. To date, the policies and programs supported and inspired by the Act have been credited with providing lifesaving assistance to hundreds of thousands of victims.
In our letter to Congress earlier this year, Attorneys General pointed out to members a U.S. Department of Justice study that showed VAWA has transformed the response to domestic violence at the local, state and federal level. Its successes have been dramatic, with the annual incidence of domestic violence falling by more than 50 percent.
According to the American Bar Association, VAWA has been the single most effective federal effort to respond to the epidemic of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking in this country. The act has ensured that legal and social services are available to survivors, and that law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, attorneys and advocates are well-trained and equipped with cutting-edge resources to effectively address these crimes in their own communities.
As law enforcement leaders, we recognize the importance of the Violence Against Women Act because domestic violence very clearly remains a serious problem, not only in New Mexico, but throughout the nation. One in four women in America experience domestic violence or sexual assault, and three women die at the hands of abusive husbands or partners every day.
In addition, human trafficking remains a related pervasive problem. The U.S. government estimates that 100,000 victims of human trafficking live in the United States today, and that as many as 17,500 foreign-born victims are illegally trafficked in from abroad each year. Many, if not most, of these victims are women who are coerced into prostitution and/or other forms of sexual exploitation, and forced labor. We need every available tool to fight these crimes.
Congress reauthorized VAWA twice in the last decade, New Mexico and the nation have a vested interest in seeing that it does so again. I strongly encourage you to contact your Congressional delegation and ask them to support the bipartisan Senate version for reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.
Gary K. King
New Mexico Attorney General
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Unlimited Campaign Cash Breeds Corruption
Attorney General King is asking the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn the lower Court’s ruling that negated parts of New Mexico’s Campaign Report Act by declaring unconstitutional the sections that limited campaign contributions to independent expenditure committees.
Why? Such committees' primary purpose is to influence elections. Allowing unlimited amounts of cash to flow into New Mexico invites corruption and special interest manipulation of our elections. Unlimited cash contributions to political campaigns puts out the welcome mat for “Pay to Play” scandals...New Mexico can ill afford to have any more of this type of corruption.
The Attorney General has made contribution limits and full disclosure a cornerstone of his office's focus. Not only is the sovereignty of New Mexico elections threatened with this ruling but our ability to ensure our elected offices are not for sale is jeopardized.
AG King will continue to press this issue in federal courts so that all New Mexicans can be assured that their elected officials answer solely to them. Reasonable contribution limits for independent expenditure committees is a reasonable requirement.
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
Who's Collecting Personal Info About You?
Most of us share information about ourselves without realizing we have done so. For example, your favorite grocery items, restaurants, shoe brand, and even your medical prescription history could be shared and perhaps sold to a third party.
Attorney General King's office regularly cautions consumers to be careful about revealing personal information because it is often used to steal your identity and commit fraud and other crimes.
I think you will be surprised at how your personal habits are spread around the world without your knowledge. Please follow the link below to a thought-provoking message from the Federal Trade Commission.
Friday, April 13, 2012
It's NOT What's for Dinner
Horse meat for human consumption? The idea is repugnant to every individual I have spoken to in the last few days, not one person could even fathom the prospect. Yet, a meat company in Roswell has applied to the U.S.D.A. for a permit to begin slaughtering horses, ostensibly in hopes of expanding their business.
Attorney General King is strongly against the plan to begin butchering horses. The latest news about horses in New Mexico comes on the heels of other negative accounts about the state's horse racing industry and a horse auction facility where some horses were found to be horribly suffering from injury and malnutrition.
News of the horse slaughtering plan spread rapidly throughout New Mexico and today is a national story. Please follow the link below.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)