A Jan. 6 defendant from Texas who ran for Congress last year and is reportedly attempting another political run has been granted permission to “examine and publish” footage, evidence and discovery from his criminal case surrounding the events of the 2021 Capitol attack — but the Justice Department says not so fast.

Ryan Zink, 35, of Lubbock, was granted access last week by U.S. District Judge James Boasberg on account of the DOJ not filing a memorandum in opposition to Zink’s March 22 motion to lift a protective order keeping his case material sealed. Boasberg issued a minute order on April 9 announcing his decision, which the DOJ apparently saw and responded to Wednesday with the document in question.

“As the Government has not opposed Defendant’s Motion to Lift Protective Order, the Court orders that the Motion is granted, and the Protective Order is lifted,” a docket entry from Boasberg said last week.

In response, the DOJ’s top prosecutor in Washington, D.C., Ed Martin, signed off on a memorandum in opposition Wednesday that said granting such a request to Zink would put people at risk and pose a threat to national security.

“Lifting a protective order in this case creates a dangerous opportunity and could potentially place sensitive information in the possession of those who would use it to harm the national security, in addition to allowing terabytes of information including individual defendants’, witnesses’, and victims’ personal identifying information to be released to the public,” Martin said. “The government has thus demonstrated that release of these materials could cause a significant hazard to others, and there is no prejudice to the defendant from continuing the protective order here.”

A Jan. 6 defendant and Oath Keepers member from Florida who was linked to an explosives-laden RV that was allegedly brought to the Washington, D.C., area had a series of separate convictions — for possessing illegal firearms and U.S. Army grenades — officially vacated and dismissed by a federal judge Wednesday in the Sunshine State as part of President Donald Trump’s Jan. 6 pardon order.

Jeremy Brown, a former U.S. Army Green Beret who was given a seven-year sentence for the weapons and grenades case, gained support from Trump’s Justice Department in late February, with federal prosecutors telling U.S. District Judge Steven Merryday that “based on consultation” with DOJ leadership it was the position of the United States that the offenses Brown was accused of — including possessing a modified AR-15 short-barreled rifle and sawed-off shotgun, both unregistered and owned illegally — were “intended to be covered” by Trump’s pardon order.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Allegations that murder defendant was ‘a…

Criminal Justice

Allegations that murder defendant was ‘a drug ho’ who practiced witchcraft leads to tossed conviction

By Debra Cassens Weiss

February 25, 2025, 9:15 am CST

The New Mexico Supreme Court has overturned a woman’s 2022 murder conviction and barred a retrial because of “severe and pervasive prosecutorial misconduct, exacerbated by a lackluster defense.”

The state supreme court tossed the conviction and the case against Desiree Lensegrav, concluding in a Feb. 20 opinion that her “entire trial was filled with theatrics, hyperbole and disparaging inflammatory statements.”

In his opening statement, the prosecutor called Lensegrav “a worthless mother” and “a drug ho—not my words!” the opinion said. During the trial, the prosecution called a witness who accused Lensegrav of witchcraft. In closing statements, the prosecutor encouraged jurors to convict Lensegrav “for the stench of death that permeated this courtroom.”

The prosecutor was referring to the introduction of “foul-smelling” physical evidence that was attached to the victim’s body, which caused a trial adjournment.

The Legal Profession Blog posted highlights from the opinion, while the Taos News and KOB had coverage. The state supreme court also issued a Feb. 20 press release.

The opinion identified the lead prosecutor as Assistant District Attorney Cosme Ripol of the Eighth Judicial District in New Mexico. He will not be commenting in response to an ABA Journal request, according to the district office manager.

Eighth Judicial District Attorney Marcus J. Montoya issued a statement.

“Though we prepared fully to present this case at trial, secured a conviction and would have preferred to keep this truly bad actor in prison, we accept the opinion of the supreme court, and we will always learn and evolve so as to continually improve,” Montoya said.

Lensegrav’s husband, Aram Montoya, pleaded guilty to murder in the killing in 2021 and received a life sentence. In his opening statement, Ripol told jurors about Aram Montoya’s statements incriminating Lensegrav, even though he was not on the prosecution witness list.

Referring to Lensegrav, Ripol said jurors will hear a story “of a strong, smart, determined, manipulative, vengeful, capable, controlling, resilient, cunning human being with a profound drug problem” who used her “needy, insecure” husband to commit murder.

Ripol also told jurors about expected testimony from the owner of a drug house. The owner would testify that Lensegrav suggested on several occasions that she was a witch, and she “would put menstrual blood concoctions” in her husband’s food to control him, Ripol said. The owner saw Lensegrav’s eyes turn “black. With fury. And rage,” Ripol said. “And it was like a Hollywood movie. He could feel the wind coming out of her.”

Lensegrav and Aram Montoya became suspects in 2020 after Aram Montoya was accused of trying to kill Lensegrav by repeatedly stabbing her in the neck and back with a paring knife. After Lensegrav came out of a medically induced coma, police gave her a Miranda warning and began to question her about the 2019 murder of Joseph Morgas. Police told Lensegrav that her husband had confessed to the murder, and her husband had thrown her “under the bus.”

Lensegrav told police that she wanted Aram Montoya to beat up Morgas because of his statements at the drug house. Morgas was a relative of a man who raped and impregnated Lensegrav when she was a teenager.

Lensegrav said Morgas laughed at her, called her a drug whore, and said she deserved to be raped. He also said he had video of Lensegrav at the drug house, and he would share it with his family, so they could get custody of her child.

Aram Montoya and Morgas fought outside the drug house, Lensegrav told police. Aram Montoya put Morgas in a headlock and “choked him out,” causing him to turn purple and go limp, she said. Lensegrav said she helped dispose of the body, fearing that Aram Montoya would kill her, too, if she didn’t cooperate.

Ripol told jurors that Lensegrav had confessed to strangling Morgas with twine, directed her husband to burn the body and to cut off Morgas’ head with a shovel, and had thrown the shovel and head in the river.

“None of these allegations would conform to the evidence,” the New Mexico Supreme Court said.

“Inexplicably,” the state supreme court said, “defense counsel did not object to the vast majority of instances of prosecutorial misconduct that defendant identifies on appeal.”

The New Mexico Supreme Court concluded that the prosecutorial misconduct was so unfairly prejudicial that it presented a double jeopardy bar to a retrial under the New Mexico Constitution.

“Prosecutors are held to the highest ethical standards in all courtrooms, and any time that standard is not maintained, reversal and this type of circumstance is the result. Like many trials get, this case became emotionally charged,” Montoya said in his statement to the Journal.

“Fortunately, the person we know was physically guilty of taking Mr. Morgas’ life is still in prison, and he will stay there,” Montoya said.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

A pardoned Jan. 6 defendant from Kentucky is going back to prison to serve out his term for separate firearms convictions after he had been erroneously released from custody.

Dan Edwin Wilson, 49, was ordered on Friday to self-surrender to federal authorities to serve the remaining time of his 60-month — or five-year — sentence.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Judge reassigned after he orders defendant…

Judiciary

Judge reassigned after he orders defendant to wear condom and jokes ‘probation’s gonna check’

By Debra Cassens Weiss

September 30, 2024, 3:51 pm CDT

A Florida judge has been reassigned to civil court after he told a defendant to always wear a condom and repeated gay double entendres from a 1990s comedy show in a different case.

Broward County, Florida, Circuit Judge Gary Farmer’s Aug. 15 comments were caught on tape, the South Florida Sun Sentinel reports in a story republished by Yahoo News.

Florida Politics followed with a story noted by the Florida Bar’s Daily News Summary.

The South Florida Sun Sentinel quoted Farmer’s remarks in three incidents.

Farmer made the condom remark after hearing that a car-theft defendant was expecting three children from three different mothers, according to the South Florida Sun Sentinel.

“You’ve been busy,” Farmer said. “You were just shooting all over the place. … I’m going to order that you wear a condom at all times. It’s for your own good. Probation’s gonna check. No, I’m kidding.”

Farmer later told the defendant that he is assigning a new defense lawyer.

“Don’t get her pregnant,” he said.

In another case, Farmer reacted to a defense lawyer’s reference to actor Marlon Wayans from the 1990s sketch comedy show In Living Color, the South Florida Sun Sentinel reported. Farmer repeated gay double entendres, referencing a football sketch.

“Two snaps up and a sweater,” Farmer said. “He likes it when the Oilers play the Packers. He used to be a tight end, and now he’s a wide receiver.”

In a third incident on the same day, Farmer responded to a defendant who was shouting expletives. Farmer warned the defendant about being held in contempt and then appeared to be responding to efforts to remove the defendant.

“What the f- – -,” Farmer said, apparently stopping before using the full F-word.

Farmer was reassigned because of “certain statements” he made, according to a statement by court administrators for the 17th Judicial Circuit in Florida, where Farmer is a judge. The statement said Farmer “admitted transgressions with the [Florida Supreme Court’s] Code of Judicial Conduct” in a meeting with the chief judge, according to the South Florida Sun Sentinel.

Farmer did not immediately respond to an ABA Journal message seeking comment left with his office.

Before his election to the bench, Farmer was the Democratic leader in the Florida Senate before he was ousted from the position by party members, according to Florida Politics and the South Florida Sun Sentinel

A onetime FBI agent facing felony charges for allegedly storming the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 says his trial should be delayed because the upcoming presidential election has created too “charged” of an atmosphere for him to get a fair trial.

Jared Wise is facing felony civil disorder and assault charges, as well as a handful of disorderly conduct and trespassing misdemeanors for joining the mob of Donald Trump supporters that violently descended on the Capitol that day. As Law&Crime has previously reported, Wise, who worked for the FBI from 2004 to 2016 and served as a supervisory special agent, allegedly yelled “kill ’em” at Jan. 6 rioters clashing with police, who he called “the Gestapo.” He has complained that he is being targeted for his political beliefs.

Following a weeklong trial in Washington, D.C., Michael Sparks, the very first rioter to breach the Capitol on Jan. 6 — he climbed through a window smashed apart by none other than convicted Proud Boys member Dominic Pezzola — has been found guilty on six charges, including felony obstruction of an official proceeding and civil disorder.

The Kentucky resident came before jurors in the nation’s capital for a week before they rendered a guilty verdict across six counts. Besides the felony charges, Sparks was also convicted of misdemeanor offenses including entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds, disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds, disorderly conduct in a Capitol building, and parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Defendant acquitted by reason of insanity…

U.S. Supreme Court

Defendant acquitted by reason of insanity can’t be retried, despite inconsistency, SCOTUS rules in Jackson opinion

By Debra Cassens Weiss

February 21, 2024, 3:13 pm CST

The U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that Georgia can’t retry a defendant who was found not guilty of malice murder by reason of insanity, even though the verdict was inconsistent with jury findings on other charges.

“The jury’s verdict constituted an acquittal for double jeopardy purposes, and an acquittal is an acquittal notwithstanding its apparent inconsistency with other verdicts that the jury may have rendered,” wrote Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson for the Supreme Court in a Feb. 21 decision.

The defendant, Damian McElrath, was accused of malice murder, felony murder and aggravated assault for the 2012 killing of his adoptive mother. McElrath was diagnosed with schizophrenia during a two-week hospitalization, and he killed his mother one week after his discharge.

McElrath told police that he killed his mother because he thought that she was poisoning his food. Jurors found McElrath not guilty by reason of insanity for malice murder. But on the other charges, jurors found McElrath guilty but mentally ill. The assault conviction was a predicate for felony murder and merged into the felony murder conviction.

A defendant is not guilty by reason of insanity in Georgia if, at the time of the crime, he did not have mental capacity to distinguish between right and wrong or he committed the crime because of a delusional compulsion to act that overcame his will to resist committing the crime. A defendant acquitted on this basis is committed to a state mental health facility until a court determines he may be released.

A defendant who is found guilty but mentally ill may, at the discretion of the corrections department, be referred for mental health treatment.

The verdicts were inconsistent because they required different mental states that can’t exist at the same time, the Georgia Supreme Court said.

The state supreme court determined that both murder verdicts should be set aside under the state’s repugnancy doctrine, which says a verdict can be set aside if it involves affirmative findings by the jury that are not legally and logically possible. The state supreme court authorized a retrial on all charges.

The Supreme Court rejected Georgia’s reasoning and held that McElrath can’t be retried on the malice murder charge.

“Georgia is mistaken,” Jackson wrote. “Once there has been an acquittal, our cases prohibit any speculation about the reasons for a jury’s verdict—even when there are specific jury findings that provide a factual basis for such speculation. … We simply cannot know why the jury in McElrath’s case acted as it did, and the double jeopardy clause forbids us to guess.”

On remand, the Supreme Court said in a footnote, Georgia courts can address the status of McElrath’s vacated felony murder conviction under state law.

Bloomberg Law and the Equal Justice Initiative covered the decision, while SCOTUSblog covered the opinion announcement on its live blog. The Washington Post had previous coverage of the case.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. ‘Airborne defendant’ leaps over bench, attacks…

Criminal Justice

‘Airborne defendant’ leaps over bench, attacks Vegas judge during court hearing recorded on video

By Debra Cassens Weiss

January 4, 2024, 9:55 am CST

A man who pleaded guilty to attempted battery with substantial bodily harm attacked a Las Vegas judge who was sentencing him Wednesday.

The video shows defendant Deobra Delone Redden, 30, leaping into the air, flying over the judge’s bench and landing on the judge. A Politico headline described Redden as an “airborne defendant.”

Other publications with coverage include the New York Times, the Associated Press, the Las Vegas Review-Journal, the Washington Post, USA Today, KSNV and the New York Post.

The Clark County, Nevada, judge, 62-year-old Judge Mary Kay Holthus, was injured and being monitored, a court spokesperson told the New York Times. A marshal who was injured was taken to the hospital. KSNV reported that the marshal needed stitches to his head. The marshal also suffered a dislocated shoulder, according to AP.

The first person who came to Holthus’ aid was a man in a suit sitting beside her. In a longer video posted by the AP, the same man is shown punching Redden as another man in a suit tries to subdue him. Redden is shown throwing punches at this same time at a person who is outside the video frame.

One of the people trying to subdue Redden was Chief Deputy District Attorney Jory Scarborough, Clark County District Attorney Steve Wolfson told the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

“Thank God the judge is OK,” Wolfson said in a statement cited by the New York Post. “Thank God for the heroic efforts of those who came to her aid, especially her marshal and her law clerk. Without them, the situation would have been much worse, as this defendant exhibited extremely violent behavior, and I’m confident there will be consequences.”

Redden has been charged with battery, battery on a protected person and battery on a protected person resulting in substantial bodily harm.

Redden had sought probation, telling the judge that he had mental health problems, but he was “a person who never stops trying to do the right thing—no matter how hard it is.” His lawyer, Caesar Almase, said Redden had been diagnosed with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.

Redden attacked Holthus after she indicated that he would be sentenced to prison. Redden previously spent time in prison for attempted theft and domestic battery.