Days after he was disciplined, Doña Ana County Magistrate Judge Carlos Garza appears to be backing off, to some degree, his admission to interfering in a case involving a woman with whom he had a personal relationship.
In comments published today in the Las Cruces Sun-News, Garza said making the admission was the easiest way to resolve the issue without a costly legal battle.
“The bottom line is I feel what I did was in the interest of justice,” Garza told the newspaper. “I know the difference between wrong and right in my job and I had to admit something for economic reasons.”
He also said the discipline was light because “the facts were very convoluted.”
The Supreme Court had some tough questions last week for Garza and the Judicial Standards Commission before accepting the discipline upon which the parties had agreed. When former Magistrate Susana Chaparro was disciplined last year for improperly involving herself in her son’s traffic case, justices said any incident in which a judge tries to influence another for personal reasons is unacceptable.
The commission had to convince justices that the recommended punishment was sufficient, arguing that this was Garza’s first time being disciplined.
Garza had previously admitted to improperly involving himself in the drunken driving case against a woman with whom he had a personal relationship. He admitted to contacting two other magistrate judges assigned to the case at different times to discuss it with them and, in at least one instance, asked one of them to set a low bond or no bond.
Despite his comments about admitting guilt because of the costs associated with fighting the allegations, Garza also told the Sun-News he should not have had contact with one of those two judges about the case.
Garza’s punishment includes a formal reprimand, six months supervised probation, formal mentorship and a $600 reimbursement of the cost of the commission’s investigation.
Garza is the second judge in recent weeks to say his actions in a disciplinary matter were based on the costs of a battle. District Judge Larry Ramirez resigned earlier this month during a probe into allegations of sexual harassment and improper conduct in the courtroom.
Ramirez wrote that the judicial discipline process is unfair because “the burden of proof is shifted to the accused” in announcing that he was resigning in part because of the expense of fighting the allegations.
Garza told the Sun-News the process is “important and necessary,” but “can be improved.”