LAS CRUCES, N.M. (AP) - A legislator and a former official of a southern New Mexico regional housing authority say they’re disappointed that a criminal case stemming from allegations of mismanagement and misspending by another authority has petered out.
Vincent “Smiley” Gallegos, a former lawmaker who headed an Albuquerque-based regional authority, pleaded no contest in December to four misdemeanors as part of an agreement under which felony charges were dismissed.
And state prosecutors recently dropped charges against three other people associated with the same authority who also charged in the case.
The Attorney General’s Office said charges against the remaining defendants were dismissed because the passage of time meant prosecutors didn’t have enough of a legal basis to take the case to trial.
The end of the case sends the wrong message, and justice hasn’t been served, said Frances Williams, a former board member for a regional housing authority that served three southern New Mexico counties.
“I’m outraged,” said Williams, whose concerns about alleged impropriety led to a statewide overhaul of the regional housing system, the Las Cruces Sun-News reported (https://goo.gl/M4uCb4 ).
Gallegos at one point pursued a defamation case against Williams in state court in Las Cruces. But Williams said the case eventually was dismissed without prejudice, meaning it could be refiled, the newspaper reported.
State Sen. Mary Kay Papen, D-Las Cruces, said was “very distressed” about the investigation’s outcome.
“I think it’s a sad day when we see people are able to do these kinds of things, defraud the public and taxpayer money, and get a slap on the wrist,” Papen said.
David Pederson, the office’s general counsel, said prosecutors were ready to take the case involving the recently dismissed charges to trial “literally for years.”
But there were delays, including court scheduling, “most of which are not in the control of my office,” he said.
By the time the trial was set, the cases weren’t as strong, Pederson said. Some potential witnesses to alleged acts that happened as far back as 2003 have died; some didn’t recall details relating to the complex cases, he said.
“We have an ethical obligation to look at cases and not take cases to trial unless we feel that we can recently meet our evidentiary burden,” he said. “Our burden of proof is the highest one in the legal system - proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Also, Pederson said the state laws in 2003 weren’t as strong as they are now.
He said the Attorney General’s Office must “show that a particular person violated a particular law, and we have to have admissible evidence in order to do that.”
“And, as part of our review in getting ready for trial, we came to the conclusion that it was not appropriate to go forward with the remaining defendants,” he said of the recently dismissed cases.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.