In a recent order, the New Mexico Supreme Court decided to move forward with the state’s request to remove embattled Eleventh Judicial District Attorney Bernadine Martin in McKinley County.
In August, citing violations of state law and other concerns, New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez filed a petition to remove Martin from office. The petition was sparked after state lawmakers voted to remove funding from Martin’s office and gave it to the neighboring district attorney in San Juan County, a move spearheaded by Senate Finance Chair George Muñoz (D-Gallup), citing turnover of Gallup prosecutors.
The findings in the AG’s petition included: a hostile workplace environment; failure to prepare or subpoena witnesses in McKinley County; breaches of procurement law, despite a prior settlement with the State Ethics Commission; “improper reliance” on contract attorneys; and Martin’s alleged continued work in private legal practice while serving as district attorney, in violation of state law.
Martin has denied all allegations in court filings. A voicemail, text message and email to Martin were not returned before publication.
Additionally in September, the state took over prosecution of two cases, alleging Martin had improperly dismissed the cases and failed to send them to an outside prosecutor.
Martin has argued that the state law allowing for removal of district attorneys only applies to her current term, which started in January of 2025, after her reelection to office in 2024. She argued it would be “obviously unjust” for the New Mexico Supreme Court to hear evidence “for misconduct [that] may have occurred during a previous term.” Moreover, Martin contends removal of district attorneys should be left either to state lawmakers or voters “when the public official stands for reelection.”
The New Mexico Attorney General’s office disagreed, citing state laws that district attorneys may be removed from office in a court proceeding, for certain reasons including: “failure, neglect or refusal” to perform the duties of the office.
In an Oct. 17 order, the New Mexico Supreme Court determined to move forward with removal proceedings, and wrote that a further order would contain the reasoning at a later date.
State law for the removal of public officials requires a trial without a jury before the Supreme Court justices.
An initial hearing is scheduled virtually for Oct. 31, and will be overseen by Special Master Alan Malott, a retired Albuquerque district judge appointed by the state’s Supreme Court to help act as a trial judge, including clarifying the exact nature of arguments and scheduling.
The Supreme Court’s decision on a removal proceeding is final, according to state law.
