Attorney General Gary King (Photo by Heath Haussamen)
The N.M. Supreme Court has given Attorney General Gary King’s office a green light to proceed with prosecution of the case against defendants in the housing authority scandal, the Albuquerque Journal is reporting.
From the Journal:
“The state Supreme Court on Friday refused to get involved — at least for now — in the AG’s prosecution of a former legislator, a prominent lawyer and two others in the Region III Housing Authority case.”
King’s office was quoted by the Journal as saying this:
“We join many New Mexicans who are glad that the procedural roadblock in front of prosecuting the Region III proceedings is finally removed. We will continue to press forward and have these cases decided on the evidence by fair and impartial juries.”
Former Region III Housing Authority Director Vincent “Smiley” Gallegos, former Region III accountant Dennis M. Kennedy, and former Region III bond attorney Robert Strumor are facing felony charges including fraud and money laundering. A fourth defendant, former Region III attorney David N. Hernandez, is charged with tampering with evidence.
The case centers on the misspending of bond money issued by the State Investment Council. Read more about the scandal here.
The question of whether King can prosecute the case has significantly delayed trial. The appeal to the state’s high court came after the Court of Appeals ruled that King can prosecute the case even though his office also represents, in a civil capacity, the housing authorities and the State Investment Council.
That dual role created, as the very least, a negative appearance, the defendants argued in a Feb. 14 filing with the Supreme Court.
King is currently fighting to prosecute another public corruption case his office has brought forward. Earlier this month, a district judge ruled that King’s office can’t prosecute the corruption case against former Secretary of State Rebecca Vigil-Giron and others because of perceptions of a conflict.
Lawyers for the defendants had alleged a conflict because the AG’s office provided counsel to the secretary of state on contracts related to the indictment, and also because one of the defendants used to work in the AG’s office.
King’s options in that case are to appeal the ruling or hand the case over to a special prosecutor.