As Seen in Journal
E-mail Story
Print Friendly
Send E-mail
Reprint storyPlay Puzzles and Free Games
Front Page 
paperboy text news metro
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
Judge Mulls Statute in Blocks' Case
By Vic Vela
Journal Northern Bureau
SANTA FE — A judge on Monday said he is "troubled" by language in the state election law that Public Regulation Commissioner Jerome Block Jr. and his father are charged with violating.
State District Judge Michael Vigil, in a hearing Monday that included testimony by Secretary of State Mary Herrera, said he's considering whether to dismiss at least some of the charges against Block and his father, Jerome Block Sr., himself a former member of the PRC.
"This is such an unusual statute," Vigil said. "Maybe it's a poorly drafted statute. But, boy, we're gonna have to interpret it here."
The case against the Blocks stems from alleged wrongdoing during Block Jr.'s successful 2008 PRC campaign. The criminal charges were filed after the Secretary of State's Office already had fined Block Jr. for campaign irregularities.
In 2008, Herrera's office fined Block Jr. $11,700 for election law violations, including using $2,500 from his taxpayer-financed campaign fund to pay for what Block reported as a performance by a country-western band at a campaign rally. Block eventually admitted the band never played for his Democratic campaign effort.
Herrera also required Block to return $10,000 in public campaign funds.
The state Attorney General's Office later indicted the Blocks on 12 criminal counts.
Attorneys for the Blocks argue that the Voter Action Act — under which state government finances campaigns for PRC candidates, to reduce the influence of businesses regulated by the commission — does not allow the Attorney General's Office to charge a candidate criminally once the secretary of state has imposed fines for violations.
Civil penalties plus criminal charges is akin to double jeopardy and the AG's Office has no authority to prosecute a candidate once he or she has been fined by the Secretary of State's Office, the Blocks' defense argues.
The word "or" in the Voter Action Act is crucial to the argument. Block Jr. attorney Carolyn "Cammie" Nichols maintained at Monday's hearing that under the wording of the statute, the secretary of state can "impose a fine or transmit the finding to the attorney general for prosecution" but cannot do both.
Vigil didn't rule Monday but is expected to do so next week. The judge said he's "troubled by the statute" drafted by the Legislature.
"Here, it's a little confusing as to whether both (civil fines and criminal prosecution) should happen," he said.
You also can send comments via our comment form
|
|
