New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez Condemns Harassment of Juror and Defends Integrity of Justice System After Judge Releases Defendant Following Manslaughter Conviction

Las Cruces, NM – Today Judge Jim Foy released former Las Cruces Police Officer Brad Lunsford following a contentious hearing on several motions filed by Lunsford’s defense team in the wake of his manslaughter conviction on February 12, 2025. Judge Foy denied the defense’s motion for an acquittal notwithstanding the verdict but heard argument on a separate motion related to the final selection of jurors in the case.

Earlier this week, the New Mexico Department of Justice filed a writ of mandamus and superintending control asking the Supreme Court to stay the proceedings after defense attorneys filed a motion attacking a juror for their political beliefs and unsubstantiated allegations of bias which led to a wave of social media harassment by Lunsford’s supporters. While the stay and request to seal the records was ultimately granted by the trial court, Department lawyers will continue to seek a protective order to ensure the juror’s safety and to protect any attacks on their political beliefs as a violation of the First Amendment.

“The defense’s accusations of bias based on a juror’s political beliefs is contrary to the law and to the impartial administration of justice,” said Attorney General Raúl Torrez. “Jurors are entrusted to decide cases based on evidence—not to be subjected to public humiliation and personal attacks for an unpopular verdict. The defense team failed to do their job during jury selection and should not be allowed to engage in a partisan witch-hunt now that a properly seated jury rejected Lunsford’s defense and found him guilty of manslaughter.”

After a lengthy argument by both defense lawyers and prosecutors, Judge Foy reversed his prior decision to remand Lunsford into custody and released him on conditions until the resolution of the defense’s motions. The next hearing in this case is set for March 28.

See below for the state’s motions to protect juror identity and provide for first amendment protections, and our writ to the Supreme Court.

Petition for Writ of Mandamus or Sup Control Foy – 3rd JD – Filed