Darcy Smith

Victim: Adam Price, 17

Age at time of murder: 17

Crime date: November 23, 1992

Crime location: Bernardo, New Mexico

Partners in crime: Eric Smith, 22, and Mark Apodaca, 20

Crimes: Kidnapping and murder

Murder method: 10 gunshots

Weapon: .44 revolver, 9 millimeter handgun, and shotgun

Convictions:  First degree felony murder & false imprisonment

Sentence: Life imprisonment for the murder and 18 months for false imprisonment (consecutive)

Incarceration status: Incarcerated at the Western New Mexico Correctional Facility (0ffender# 25231)

Offender 25231 Photo

Summary of the crime

Darcy Smith and her partners in crime decided to “scare the hell” out of someone. They kidnapped Adam and shot him over 10 times.

Details

Darcy Smith (“D. Smith”), 17, her future husband Eric Smith (“E. Smith), 22, and their friend and Smith’s brother-in-law Mark Apodaca carried out the viscous murder of Adam Price on November 23, 1992. The three assailants decided to go out and shoot rabbits. At some point, they decided to pick someone up at random to “scare the hell” out of them. Their victim was Adam Price, a 17-year-old high school senior. They kidnapped him at gunpoint from an area near the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque. The kidnappers took Adam on a drive of terror. They stopped a short distance from the Bernardo exit of Interstate 25 and forced Adam out of the car.

E. Smith beat Adam and shot him twice with a .44 revolver. After Adam fell to the ground, D. Smith shot him twice with a 9 millimeter handgun. After shooting him, D. Smith picked up one of the spent casings from her gun to take as a souvenir. E. Smith then got a shotgun and he and Apodaca each shot Adam three more times. According to Apodaca’s testimony, Smith was excited about the shooting and “hyped” during the ride back to Albuquerque. The murderers were apprehended in December 1993.

STATE v. SMITH

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Darcy SMITH, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 25,106.

Decided: January 23, 2001

{1} In March 1998, Defendant Darcy Smith was convicted of first degree felony murder in violation of NMSA 1978, § 30-2-1(A)(2) (1980, prior to 1994 amendment) and false imprisonment in violation of NMSA 1978, § 30-4-3 (1963).   She was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder and to eighteen months for false imprisonment with the sentences to be served consecutively.   We review this case on direct appeal under Rule 12-102(A)(1) NMRA 2001.   On appeal, Defendant raises the following challenges to the convictions:  (1) there was insufficient evidence to convict her of either felony murder or false imprisonment;  (2) the trial court erred in admitting certain evidence, in restricting Defendant’s cross-examination of two witnesses, and in refusing two of her proposed jury instructions;  and (3) the prosecutor improperly commented on Defendant’s right to silence and character.   We affirm Defendant’s convictions.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

{2} On the morning of November 24, 1992, the body of the seventeen-year-old murder victim was discovered in a remote area near Bernardo, New Mexico, in Socorro County.   The state police were able to establish his identity from a gift certificate found on the body which had been given to him by his grandparents for his birthday on November 23.   The crime remained unsolved until late 1993, when the New Mexico State Police arranged for a Crime Stoppers television program about the murder.   Several weeks after the broadcast, Defendant’s friend, Jennifer Jones, contacted Michael Davies, who was in charge of the state police investigation.   Ms. Jones provided information implicating Defendant, Eric Smith (Smith), and Mark Apodaca (Apodaca) in the murder of the victim.   At the time of the murder, Smith and Apodaca had been good friends for some time, and Apodaca was married to Defendant’s sister.   Defendant and Smith had married in June 1993 and shortly after their marriage, began a house sharing arrangement with the Jones couple which continued until Defendant and Smith were arrested in December 1993.

{3} Apodaca was arrested first and gave a voluntary statement about the killing.   Defendant and Smith were subsequently arrested and charged in the victim’s death.   In a separate trial, Smith was convicted of felony murder, false imprisonment, aggravated assault, conspiracy, tampering with evidence, and contributing to the delinquency of a minor.   Apodaca pleaded guilty to second degree murder and related crimes in a plea agreement.   As part of that agreement, Apodaca agreed to testify truthfully about Defendant’s participation in the victim’s death.   Defendant, who was seventeen years old at the time of the murder, was charged initially in children’s court.   See In re Darcy S., 1997-NMCA-026, ¶ 1, 123 N.M. 206, 936 P.2d 888.   In January 1994, the State filed a motion to transfer Defendant to district court to be tried as an adult.  Id. ¶ 2. After an evidentiary hearing on the motion, the children’s court transferred Defendant to district court for trial as an adult.  Id. ¶ 3. Defendant subsequently filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals contesting the transfer decision and raising claims of due process and speedy trial violations Id. ¶ 1. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s actions.  Id. ¶ 36.

{4} At trial, Apodaca testified about the events on the night of the murder.   Ms. Jones, and her estranged husband, Brian Jones, also testified about Defendant’s later admissions regarding that evening’s events.   Apodaca stated that he, Smith, and Defendant had spent the evening drinking and then decided to go out and shoot rabbits.   Each was armed with a weapon:  Smith with a .44 caliber revolver, Defendant with a 9 millimeter handgun in a holster on her right hip, and Apodaca with a 12 gauge shotgun.   Apodaca testified that they had gone shooting before and Defendant was proficient in the use of various weapons, including the type of handgun she had with her that night.

{5} At some point, the three of them decided to pick someone up at random to “scare the hell” out of that person.   In an area near the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque, they spotted the victim. Smith forced him into the backseat of his two-door car at gunpoint, and they all drove off.   Apodaca said that, as they were driving, Smith became angry with the victim.   He asked Apodaca to steady the steering wheel so that Smith could turn around in the driver’s seat to hit the victim in the face with the butt of his .44 revolver.   While Apodaca steered the car during the beating, Defendant put her foot on the gas pedal to maintain the car’s speed.   Smith left Interstate 25 at the Bernardo exit and drove a short distance from the exit.   After he stopped the car, Smith took the victim out of the car and had him stand at the back of the car where Defendant and Apodaca joined them.   After further angry words, Smith began to beat the victim and then shot him twice with the .44 revolver.   After the victim fell to the ground, Defendant then shot him twice with her 9 millimeter handgun.   Apodaca testified that after she shot the victim, Defendant picked up one of the spent casings from her gun as a souvenir.   Smith next retrieved the shotgun from the car, and he and Apodaca each shot the victim three more times.   Afterward Defendant, Smith, and Apodaca got back in the car and left the victim there.   Apodaca described Defendant as being excited about the shooting and “hyped” during the ride back to Albuquerque.

{6} At trial, Dr. Ross Zumwalt, chief medical investigator for the Office of the Medical Investigator, testified as an expert in forensic pathology about the autopsy of the victim.   The autopsy revealed that the victim had been shot ten times and had bled to death from his wounds, although given the extent and severity of his injuries, it was unlikely that he could have survived.   The victim also had numerous injuries to the face including bruises and lacerations caused by a blunt object.   Dr. Zumwalt testified that the injuries were consistent with being struck by the butt of a revolver.   Additional bruising found on the victim’s forearms and the back of his hand also was caused by a blunt object.   These bruises were described as defensive injuries which can occur when a person raises his or her arms or hands as protection from blows.   The supervisor of the firearms identification section at the Department of Public Safety’s Crime Lab testified as an expert witness.   He described the testing process he used on the bullets and shotgun pellets retrieved from the victim’s body during the autopsy and those found at the scene.   He testified that weapons involved in the murder had been a 12 gauge shotgun, a .44 caliber revolver, and a 9 millimeter weapon.

IN RE: DARCY S.

Tom Udall, Attorney General, Max Shepherd, Assistant Attorney General, Santa Fe, for appellee. Paul J. Kennedy, Mary Y.C. Han, Albuquerque, for appellant.

OPINION

1. The Child, Darcy S., appeals from an order of the children’s court transferring her to stand trial as an adult on the charges of murder, false imprisonment, aggravated assault with intent to commit a violent felony, and conspiracy.   Two issues are raised on appeal:  (1) whether the Child’s due-process rights were denied by the admission of the statements of a co-defendant;  and (2) whether the Child’s speedy-trial rights were violated.   A third issue listed in the docketing statement was not briefed on appeal and is deemed abandoned.  State v. Calvillo, 110 N.M. 114, 115, 792 P.2d 1157, 1158 (Ct.App.1990).   We affirm.

2. On November 24, 1992, the body of Adam Price, a seventeen-year-old youth (the victim), was discovered in a remote area of Socorro County, New Mexico.   Subsequent investigation revealed that the victim had been killed by multiple bullet wounds from several weapons, including a shotgun.   Following a Crime Stoppers broadcast concerning the homicide, police received a call from Jennifer Jones advising them that she had information implicating the Child, Eric Smith (Smith), and Mark Apodaca (Apodaca) in the victim’s killing.   Smith and Apodaca were subsequently charged as adults with the murder of the victim on January 21, 1994.   The Child, who was seventeen years old at the time of the killing, was charged in the children’s court with murder, with firearm enhancement, false imprisonment, aggravated assault with intent to commit a violent felony, conspiracy, and tampering with evidence.   At the time the victim was killed, the Child was married to the co-defendant Smith.   On January 27, 1994, the State moved, pursuant to NMSA 1978, Section 32-1-30 (Repl.Pamp.1989),1 to transfer the Child to the district court for trial as an adult.

3. Following an extended evidentiary hearing on the motion to transfer, the children’s court dismissed the charge of tampering with evidence, found that probable cause existed to believe that the Child committed each of the other acts charged in the petition, and that the Child was not amenable to treatment or rehabilitation as a juvenile.   The order transferring the Child to stand trial as an adult specifically found that the Child “was fifteen years of age or more” at the time of the alleged offenses, that there was probable cause to believe the Child committed each of the delinquent acts charged, except tampering with evidence, that the Child was not amenable to treatment or rehabilitation through available facilities, and that each of the other requirements of Section 32-1-30 had been satisfied.   Based on its findings, the children’s court ordered that the Child be transferred to district court for trial as an adult.