{"id":40917,"date":"2012-06-14T07:17:25","date_gmt":"2012-06-14T13:17:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nmpolitics.net\/index\/?p=40917"},"modified":"2012-06-14T20:21:06","modified_gmt":"2012-06-15T02:21:06","slug":"prescription-drug-disclosure-is-latest-fight-in-murphy-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/2012\/06\/prescription-drug-disclosure-is-latest-fight-in-murphy-case\/","title":{"rendered":"Prescription drug disclosure is latest fight in Murphy case"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Ninth<\/a>

Ninth Judicial District Attorney Matt Chandler<\/p><\/div>\n

Former Third Judicial District Judge Mike Murphy\u2019s bribery trial remains on hold while the Court of Appeals considers whether to reinstate a misdemeanor charge. No trial date has been set.<\/h4>\n

The prosecutor in the bribery case against former Third Judicial District Judge Mike Murphy is fighting a judge\u2019s order that a key witness turn over a list of every prescription drug she has taken during the past five years.<\/p>\n

Ninth Judicial District Attorney Matt Chandler has asked the N.M. Supreme Court to overturn Judge Leslie C. Smith\u2019s order requiring District Judge Lisa Schultz \u2013 a witness in the case \u2013 to turn over the information to him so he can decide, what, if any, of it is relevant.<\/p>\n

In addition to arguing that Schultz\u2019s medication history is irrelevant and that case law doesn\u2019t support requiring its disclosure, Chandler argued in his June 4 filing that requiring the disclosure would \u201cnot only have a chilling effect upon witnesses who wish to disclose illegal activity, it would also open the floodgates for this type of harassment to occur.\u201d<\/p>\n

Read the filing here<\/a>. The Supreme Court has not yet responded.<\/p>\n

Murphy\u2019s bribery trial remains on hold<\/a> while the Court of Appeals considers whether to reinstate a misdemeanor charge. No trial date has been set.<\/p>\n

In the meantime, lawyers have been arguing about Schultz\u2019s prescription history, but Chandler states in his filing that it\u2019s not relevant to the case \u2013 which is \u201cnot based in any form of fashion\u201d on Schultz\u2019s memory but is instead \u201cbased entirely on a tape recording\u201d of a conversation Schultz had with Murphy.<\/p>\n

In spite of that, Smith\u2019s final order on the issue, dated June 4, states that he \u201csimply wants to review whether the medications taken by the witness at the relevant time have side effects that include memory loss or forgetfulness.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Judge Lisa Schultz, shown here leaving the grand jury room after testifying in the Murphy case last year. (Photo by Heath Haussamen)<\/p><\/div>\n

In his appeal, Chandler states that Smith \u201cis now acting as an expert in pharmaceuticals by independently reviewing what medications he believes can cause memory loss.\u201d<\/p>\n

Judge says Schultz can\u2019t testify unless she complies<\/h3>\n

The issue first came up, Chandler wrote in his appeal, when Murphy\u2019s attorney, Michael Stout, was interviewing Schultz on Sept. 19. Stout asked whether Schultz was on any medications, including antidepressants. Schultz refused to answer, citing the federal medical confidentiality law HIPPA<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Stout later raised the issue with Smith, saying it was appropriate to ask about medications because Schultz had surgery in 2008 and had to take medical leave. The crimes Murphy is alleged to have committed took place between September 2007 and December 2010.<\/p>\n

Smith responded to Stout at that hearing with a hypothetical situation he acknowledged was \u201cabsurd,\u201d saying if a witness was using heroin the jury would probably want to know that because, \u201cwhen you\u2019re an addict, you don\u2019t remember anything. Everything is kind of fuzzy.\u201d<\/p>\n

Chandler objected. So did Schultz.<\/p>\n

\u201cI\u2019m wondering why I\u2019m being treated like a rape victim as opposed to, say, a witness of a train wreck,\u201d the transcript of the hearing quotes Schultz as saying. \u201c\u2026 I\u2019m saying that this is a violation of my HIPPA rights to privacy\u2026 that, because I am disabled and because I had a foot surgery, now my medications are going to be disclosed?\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cIf you don\u2019t want to make it, don\u2019t make it,\u201d Smith responded about the list he is seeking. \u201cIt\u2019s up to you. I\u2019m ordering you to do it, but if you don\u2019t want to do it, I can\u2019t make you do it.\u201d<\/p>\n

Smith said Schultz only had to provide names of drugs, not dosages.<\/p>\n

In the order he issued last week, Smith made clear that he will not allow Schultz to testify unless she complies. Smith\u2019s order is on hold pending the outcome of Chandler\u2019s appeal.<\/p>\n

Schultz\u2019s testimony is critical<\/h3>\n

Without Schultz\u2019s testimony, Chandler would have a more difficult time proving his case against Murphy. Some of the charges Murphy faces stem from interactions with Schultz.<\/p>\n

Murphy currently faces felony charges stemming from two cases. His\u00a0May 2011 indictment<\/a>\u00a0on four felony charges is based on allegations that he\u00a0solicited a bribe<\/a>\u00a0from potential judicial applicant Beverly Singleman, told Schultz to tell Singleman she needed to pay the bribe, and threatened to destroy Singleman\u2019s reputation for telling others that he solicited a bribe from her.<\/p>\n

Separate from that indictment, Murphy faces\u00a0another felony charge<\/a>\u00a0for allegedly\u00a0offering \u201cseveral promises\u201d<\/a>\u00a0to Schultz in December 2010 if she would agree to be the tie-breaking vote to make Douglas R. Driggers the chief district judge in Las Cruces.<\/p>\n

Murphy has pleaded not guilty to all charges.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The prosecutor in the bribery case against former Third Judicial District Judge Mike Murphy is fighting a judge\u2019s order that a key witness turn over a list of every prescription drug she has taken during the past five years.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11],"tags":[142,117,216,161],"class_list":["post-40917","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news-and-analysis","tag-crime","tag-health-care","tag-judge-murphy","tag-judiciary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40917","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=40917"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40917\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=40917"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=40917"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=40917"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}