Man in Sex Case Will Undergo Evaluation

SANTA FE — A man who’s been found incompetent to stand trial on charges of committing sex crimes against a juvenile boy has been ordered to undergo an evaluation to determine if he presents a danger to himself or others.

That order, signed by state District Judge Stephen Pfeffer, is in the criminal case file in Magistrate Court for 44-year-old Jacob Pinto, whose criminal charges were dismissed in December without prejudice, meaning charges could be refiled.

State Attorney General spokesman Phil Sisneros declined to comment on how the office will proceed with the case. Pfeffer’s order actually stems from a separate District Court case, which is sealed and not open to public viewing.

The order says that an evaluation found Pinto is not competent to proceed in his criminal case and that he is mentally retarded under state law.

The order directs this finding to be sent to the state Department of Health and that the department’s Behavioral Health Institute must within 60 days arrange for another evaluation, one that would determine whether Pinto is likely to seriously harm himself or others. The institute must further provide an opinion whether Pinto could be treated to competency.

This appears to open the door to Pinto being committed to a state mental hospital if he is determined to be dangerous as well as incompetent, but no one interviewed for this story would confirm that.

That 60-day deadline has passed since the order is dated Sept. 4.

Pinto’s attorney Sydney West declined to comment on Pinto’s case.

Pinto has been out of jail since March under bond and on a GPS monitor.

Santa Fe police charged Pinto with criminal sexual contact after a boy, who has since turned 18, provided a video to investigators last year that showed him shirtless on the floor with cash nearby.

The boy claimed that in 2010, Pinto paid him to let Pinto lie on him chest to chest and that Pinto made sounds simulating sex. The police said they found pictures of boys at Pinto’s house, but the District Attorney’s Office said they were not pornographic.
— This article appeared on page C1 of the Albuquerque Journal