Ex-Las Cruces police officer sentenced to prison in fatal shooting

LAS CRUCES — Felipe Hernandez, the former Las Cruces police officer convicted of voluntary manslaughter in the 2023 shooting of Teresa Gomez, was sentenced in state district court Wednesday to 11 years in prison with nine to serve.

The 46-year-old is seeking a new trial, claiming prosecutorial misconduct during closing arguments, and is due back in court next week. District Attorney Fernando Macias was not available for comment Wednesday. 

Hernandez was charged with second-degree murder for shooting Gomez as she drove away from him during an early morning encounter outside a public housing complex on Oct. 3, 2023. Last October, a jury deliberated for four hours before convicting Hernandez on the lesser charge instead, with a firearm enhancement. 

The sentencing followed the rare conviction of a police officer for an on-duty killing. 

As of last year, only 1% to 5% of murder or manslaughter charges brought against police officers resulted in convictions, and prosecutions are themselves rare. Researchers with the Henry A. Wallace Police Crime Database at Bowling Green State University in Ohio have tracked crimes involving police officers since 2005 and have reported that less than 5% of such cases result in jury convictions.

Third Judicial District Judge Richard Jacquez sentenced Hernandez to six years on the voluntary manslaughter charge, enhanced by an additional five years due to discharging a firearm in the commission of a felony, with two years suspended. The sentence includes a $5,000 fine and two years of parole and probation.

Hernandez’s defense had requested that the court consider the totality of Hernandez’s career rather than “solely by his worst day,” pointing to his service in the U.S. Army and war deployments in Iraq, as well as his work as a detention officer and eight years with the Las Cruces Police Department.

In a sentencing memo, defense attorney Jeff Lahann argued that Hernandez was a dedicated public servant who felt remorse over his actions that night. He requested that most of the statutory sentence be suspended and recommended supervised probation with a focus on treatment for combat-related trauma.

“Felipe Hernandez is a man who served his country in war and his community in peace,” the memo stated. “He carries the physical and invisible scars of that service. On October 3, 2023, those scars collided with a high-stress situation, resulting in a tragedy that he deeply regrets.”

At trial, prosecutors portrayed Hernandez as a “bully with a badge,” presenting evidence that included body camera footage of an angry, profanity-laced interview with Gomez, who had been sitting in her parked vehicle with a friend. Hernandez accused the pair of trespassing, threatened to have Gomez’s car towed and to make her life “a living hell.”

Later in the interview, as shown on Hernandez’s video, Gomez asked to sit in her car and Hernandez agreed. She then turned on her engine and backed her car out of the parking spot with her door open, as Hernandez stood in its path. While stepping back and ordering her to stop, Hernandez drew his handgun and fired three rounds into the car — one of which struck and killed Gomez. She was 45 years old.

“On this day, in that moment, that was conduct that does not rise to what this community deserves from any law enforcement officer — from any person, period,” Jacquez said before pronouncing the sentence.

In 2024, the city of Las Cruces settled a civil claim with Gomez's family for $20 million.

Hernandez seeking new trial

A week before the sentencing hearing, Hernandez filed a motion for a new trial that alleged prosecutorial misconduct during closing arguments.

The law requires a prosecutor’s closing argument to the jury to focus on evidence presented at trial. When Macias began reading from the LCPD’s code of ethics during his closing argument, Lahann objected that the document had not been admitted as evidence or reviewed by the jury.

Jacquez overruled the objection and Macias proceeded to read from the document and tell the jury portions of it “are so relevant and applicable in this situation.”

Lahann argued in the motion for a new trial that Macias’ statement confused the legal standard by which jurors were instructed to judge Hernandez’s actions and interfered with a fair trial. On that basis, Hernandez is asking for the verdict to be set aside for a new trial.

In response, the DA’s office denied that the statement introduced new evidence and asserted that Macias was referring to “commonly understood aspirations” of ethical conduct by law enforcement officers.

The state’s response to the motion, authored by Deputy District Attorney Tomas Medina, argued, “The jury’s verdict rests on … bedrock evidence, not on a brief recitation of ethical duties in rebuttal.”

Macias was unavailable for comment Wednesday. A hearing on Hernandez's motion is set for Feb. 6.

Algernon D'Ammassa is the Journal's southern New Mexico correspondent. He can be reached at adammassa@abqjournal.com.