{"id":32922,"date":"2011-10-17T17:15:36","date_gmt":"2011-10-17T23:15:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nmpolitics.net\/index\/?p=32922"},"modified":"2011-10-20T09:29:10","modified_gmt":"2011-10-20T15:29:10","slug":"judge-reinstates-charges-against-murphy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/2011\/10\/judge-reinstates-charges-against-murphy\/","title":{"rendered":"Judge reinstates charges against Murphy"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>

District Judge Mike Murphy<\/p><\/div>\n

\u2018The Court refuses to be led into error because of what I consider to be incomplete briefing,\u2019 Judge Leslie Smith says in explaining the reversal of his previous decision to drop the charges<\/h4>\n

The judge overseeing the bribery case against District Judge Mike Murphy has reinstated the felony indictment he dismissed last month and set a new trial date of Feb. 6.<\/p>\n

In reinstating the indictment, Judge Leslie Smith essentially agreed with prosecutor Matt Chandler\u2019s assertion that defense attorney Michael Stout had misled him into dismissing it last month<\/a> \u2013 though he did not indicate that he believed the misleading was intentional, as Chandler has alleged.<\/p>\n

\u201cFailing to provide complete information can be just as misleading to a Court as purposefully giving inaccurate information,\u201d Smith said in the order, which he issued today. \u201c\u2026 The Court refuses to be led into error because of what I consider to be incomplete briefing.\u201d<\/p>\n

But with that statement, Smith was also pointing the finger at Chandler. For example, in one footnote about a previous judge\u2019s ex parte order that Smith didn\u2019t know about when he dismissed the charges, Smith wrote this:<\/p>\n

\u201cThat information was relevant to the original motion to dismiss and to the Defendant\u2019s motion to reconsider. Not only should the Defendant\u2019s lawyer have shared that information, but the State should have responded to the original motion to reconsider and provided that pertinent detail.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Smith told both attorneys to \u201cprovide the Court with the full and accurate information and authority\u201d with the first motion they file on an issue in the future.<\/p>\n

Read the full order here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Stout had argued in his motion seeking dismissal<\/a> of the indictment that the state failed to present exculpatory evidence \u2013 an argument Smith bought in dismissing the indictment. Chandler responded with his own motion<\/a> that refuted each of several claims made by Stout and asked Smith to reconsider.<\/p>\n

Chandler alleged at the time that Stout had \u201cbeen disingenuous with the court regarding the history of this case and the state\u2019s laws, and when the court hears all the facts and applies the applicable laws, we are hopeful that the court will revert to its original rulings and allow the state to proceed to a jury trial as scheduled.\u201d<\/p>\n

When the judge was presented with all the facts to which Chandler was referring, he agreed to reinstate the indictment. But he blamed both attorneys for not providing him with relevant facts.<\/p>\n

Chandler pleased; Stout disappointed<\/h3>\n

<\/p>\n

Chandler said today that he is \u201cpleased with the court\u2019s ruling.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cWe\u2019re prepared to go to trial in February and bring much-needed resolution to both the state and the defendant, as well as the citizens of Do\u00f1a Ana County,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

Stout said little has changed.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is a disappointing legal reversal, but it doesn\u2019t change the facts. Judge Murphy is innocent and that will stay true in the light of day before a trial jury and before the public,\u201d he said. \u201cThe disappointment is in the secret proceeding; a fair grand jury\u00a0presentation would have ended the case\u00a0sooner.\u00a0Nonetheless, we take this as an opportunity\u00a0to pursue other issues\u00a0and to make clear Judge Murphy\u2019s innocence.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is simply a bend in the road,\u201d Stout said. \u201cThe destination will be the same \u2013 the vindication of Judge Murphy.\u201d<\/p>\n

The charges Murphy now faces<\/h3>\n

Following Smith\u2019s decision to reinstate the indictment, here are the charges Murphy faces:<\/p>\n