New Mexico AG files petition for Writ against District Judge Douglas Driggers

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez was in Las Cruces on Friday to announce a petition for writ in the New Mexico Supreme Court against Las Cruces District Judge Douglas Driggers, who recently terminated the probation of a former Las Cruces High School teacher who sexually assaulted his students.

According to Torrez, Driggers' recent termination of the five-year probation for Patrick Howard, who pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a female student in 2021, violated legal mandates related to a required five years of probation for sex offenders, conditional discharge and the victim's rights to attend hearings and be heard under the Victim of Crime Act.

Driggers was appointed as a Third Judicial District judge by former Governor Bill Richardson in 2003. In general, the NMDOJ represents judges in legal matters, but Torrez said there are mechanisms in place to assist Driggers in retaining independent counsel.

"The New Mexico Department of Justice has taken this action not only because we believe the judge acted improperly and in violation of the law, but more importantly, because of the way that the process unfolded," Torrez said.

Torrez made the announcement at the Las Cruces Convention Center, alongside attorneys who have represented the victims, as well as Third Judicial District Attorney Gerald Byers.

If the New Mexico Supreme Court grants the writ, the judge's order on March 21 to discharge Howard from probation two years early and dismissed charges against him, would be null. The writ also asked to immediately stay the district court's order.

Additionally, Byers announced that his office has also filed a motion for resentencing in district court, which would reinstate Howard's probation.

"Under the statutes, a person becomes a sex offender when they enter a guilty plea and (Howard) entered a guilty plea in this case," Byers said. "That requires a mandatory period of supervised probation of no less than five years."

Victim thanks DA for attempting to reinstate Howard's probation

Civil rights attorney Shannon Kennedy read a statement from the victim on Friday.

Kennedy and attorney Mollie McGraw were in Las Cruces on Friday. They represented victims who were 15- or 16-years-old at the time the assaults occurred in 2017, in a recent federal lawsuit, where a jury awarded $44 million in damages to a victim on March 11, just two weeks before Howard's probation was terminated.

"District Attorney Byers, thank you for apologizing and for taking accountability for the situation at hand," Kennedy read from a statement from the victim. "We have not had a whole lot of that in the last seven and a half years.

"I really hope that the order to terminate Patrick Howard's felony probation is thoroughly reconsidered because I, along with the other girls, fought so hard so that this could never happen again by the hand of him. I fear history may repeat itself if it's not reconsidered."

In 2018, Howard was charged with four counts of criminal sexual contact of a minor, along with battery. According to court records, Howard pleaded guilty to one count of criminal sexual contact of a minor and the battery charge in May of 2021. The court agreed to a conditional discharge, five years of supervised probation and sex offender treatment. He did not have to register as a sex offender. The probation was amended in 2022 to allow Howard to drink alcohol in moderation and to possess firearms.

Howard's attorney made a motion to terminate the probation on March 15. On March 19, the court scheduled a notice of motion hearing on March 21, which Byers said violates the victim's constitutional rights that call for seven working days be provided by the court so that victims are able to attend any hearing.

"We received two calendar days notice," Byers said. "That did not provide our office sufficient time to notify the victims."

In the hearing, the adult probation officer deferred to the court's discretion regarding Howard's motion and the state concurred with the probation officer's recommendation.

According to Driggers's order to discharge Howard's probation, "the court finds that the Corrections Department approves said motion and that defendant has paid all fines and assessments. ... the defendant has satisfactorily fulfilled the conditions of his probation."

The writ states that the sex offender probation statute defines a sex offender as a person who is convicted of, pleads guilty to or pleads nolo contendere to, among other offenses, CSCM in the second or third degree. Howard pleaded guilty to third degree criminal sexual contact of a minor.

Terminating Howard's probation violated victim's constitutional rights

According to the petition for writ, "The court's premature termination of probation is illegal, endangers the community, and violates the victim’s constitutional and statutory rights.

"It is necessary and proper to seek relief in this Court because the State’s right of appeal under the circumstances, if any, is wholly inadequate and this legal issue must be resolved at the earliest possible opportunity."

Byers said his office has not conducted an analysis for other cases involving Driggers failing to notify victims in a timely fashion, but Torrez said the NMDOJ has requested all district attorneys in the state to identify other instances across the state of instances where the constitutional rights of victims were not granted by the court.

"I don't believe this to be an isolated incident in the state of New Mexico," Torrez said. "In virtually every corner of this state, there has been a pattern of disregard for victim's rights."

The Victim of Crime Act states that during any court proceeding, the court shall inquire on the record whether a victim is present for the purpose of making an oral statement or submitting a written statement. If the district attorney cannot verify that an attempt has been made, the court can:'

• Reschedule the hearing.

• Continue with the hearing but reserve ruling until the victim has been notified and given an opportunity to make a statement.

• Order the district attorney to notify the victim of the rescheduled hearing.

Driggers did not comply with any of that, the writ alleges.

"I think one of the most critical questions moving forward is whether or not it makes sense to continue to have victims be disadvantaged by having rights that exist on paper but somehow never seem to materialize in reality," Torrez said.

Jason Groves can be reached at 575-541-5459 or jgroves@lcsun-news.com. Follow him on X @jpgroves.

This article originally appeared on Las Cruces Sun-News: New Mexico AG files petition for Writ against District Judge Douglas Driggers