Site Map | Archives

HomeNewsLocal

Albuquerque jury finds Gonzales competent, will stand trial

related linksMore Local


*Note: The Tribune does not create and is not responsible for the blogosphere's headlines and stories. These links to blogs talking about ABQTrib.com are automatically generated. Use them at your own risk.

SHARE THIS STORY [?]

A mentally retarded man will stand trial for the slaying and rape of an 11-year-old girl after an Albuquerque jury this morning found him competent.

Jurors took less than half the morning to return their decision on Robert Gonzales, 22, after listening to two days of testimony by two psychologists with opposing viewpoints on the severity of Gonzales' mental retardation.

The case was given to the state District Court jury late Wednesday.

The decision means Gonzales will proceed to trial on charges of first-degree murder, rape and five other counts in the Halloween 2005 slaying of Victoria Sandoval.

Before that, however, Gonzales' public defenders have requested a hearing to ask state District Judge Carl Butkus to exclude their client's statement to Albuquerque police on Nov. 5, 2005.

They argue that Gonzales gave the statement after being arrested without probable cause and without voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently waiving his Miranda rights.

Gonzales, who court documents say has an IQ of 62, is accused of crawling through the girl's bedroom window at her grandparents' West Side mobile home and having sex with her.

According to an Albuquerque police statement, Gonzales, then 20, said he became angry when he learned she had lied about her age and decided he was "going to teach her a lesson" by choking her.

The girl's friends told police she met Gonzales, an older boy who called himself "Old School," in the summer at a pool and began dating him, but that she told him she was 15.

The state had argued that mental retardation does not necessarily mean incompetency. Prosecutors said Gonzales had learned to function at a level in which, if given extra support and coaching, made him competent to stand trial.

Jurors were asked to decide competency after Butkus convened a similar hearing with similar testimony in May and could not reach a decision of his own.

Competency means that the defendant understands the nature and significance of the criminal proceedings; has a factual understanding of the criminal charges; and is able to assist his attorneys in his defense.