SANTA FE – The state Supreme Court today vacated the felony murder and aggravated burglary convictions of a man for fatally shooting a Santa Fe homeowner in his backyard in 2018.
In a split decision, the Court concluded that a portal – a covered porch or patio attached to a home – is not a structure that could be burglarized under New Mexico law. As a result there was no underlying felony to elevate the homicide to a charge of felony murder.
The Court made clear that constitutional protections against double jeopardy do not preclude retrying Joseph Matthew Gregory Jones because his convictions were reversed due to a trial error and not an acquittal. Jones could be retried on lesser charges or felony murder if prosecutors can identify a legally sufficient predicate felony, the justices noted.
New Mexico law provides for different types of murder in the first degree, all of which are punishable by life in prison. Felony murder is a second-degree murder elevated to first-degree murder when the killing occurs in the commission of a felony or attempt to commit a felony.
Jones was convicted of killing Robert Romero during a struggle after the victim discovered Jones allegedly attempting to burglarize his home. The victim’s body was found slumped over a retaining wall just beyond the home’s portal, which was open on two sides and covered by a roof.
During his trial, Jones did not contest that he was the intruder but argued unsuccessfully for a ruling by the judge that there was no legal basis for the aggravated burglary charge because he never entered a space at Romero’s home where his presence was prohibited by the burglary law. That argument also was raised in his appeal to the Supreme Court.
New Mexico law defines aggravated burglary as “the unauthorized entry of any … dwelling or other structure, movable or immovable, with the intent to commit any felony or theft therein.”
In resolving the legal question in Romero’s appeal, the Court analyzed the language of the statute and previous appellate court opinions interpreting burglary law. The Court’s majority concluded that legal precedent in New Mexico requires “a space be fully enclosed to qualify as a structure” for purposes of burglary.
“Here, the portal does not qualify as a prohibited space under New Mexico’s aggravated burglary statute because it plainly is not ‘capable of completely confining people and their property.’ Therefore, whether we analyze the portal under the statute’s ‘dwelling’ or its “other structure,” the portal would not qualify as a prohibited space under even the broadest reading of the statute; it is not a structure,” the Court’s majority wrote in an opinion by Justice Julie J. Vargas.
In a dissenting opinion, Chief Justice David K. Thomson disagreed with the majority’s decision and its architectural analysis of the burglary law. When courts determine whether an area is considered a prohibited space under the law, he reasoned, the analysis should be on “whether a space invokes the privacy interest the legislature intended to protect.”
“It is beyond question that a reasonable person would expect some protection from unauthorized intrusions in the portal at issue, which is open on two sides, attached to the back of the home, and surrounded by a yard enclosed by a wooden fence,” the Chief Justice wrote.
###
To read the decision in State v. Jones, No. S-1-SC-39949, please visit the New Mexico Compilation Commission’s website using the following link:
