Appeals court reinstates evidence in DeAnna Suazo case

A homicide case involving Taos Pueblo artist DeAnna Suazo, who was found lifeless outside of her residence near her vehicle in 2021, has taken another legal turn — this time in the prosecution's favor.

On Nov. 19, the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reinstated evidence in Suazo's case that had been suppressed by the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico.

In the early hours of Nov. 13, 2021, DeAnna Autumn Leaf Suazo, 29, “suffered an untimely death outside her home on the Taos Pueblo, where she was discovered underneath her running vehicle with signs that she had been run over,” according to the appeal.

The Taos Pueblo Police Department of Public Safety and paramedics responded to the scene. FBI agents arrived about an hour before dawn, after they were contacted by Taos Pueblo Police Chief Summer Mirabal.

Mirabal told an agent Santiago Martinez claimed he and Suazo had been drinking heavily that day and had gone to Suazo’s car to listen to music. According to the criminal complaint, Martinez said he left to go put wood on the stove inside of the residence and returned to find Suazo’s unresponsive body lying on the ground near her vehicle. 

“Upon returning outside at around 3:30 a.m., he found Suazo’s vehicle running and Suazo unresponsive on the ground near the front driver’s side tire of the vehicle,” the complaint states. “Because, as Martinez reported, the front tire was against Suazo’s head and on her arm, he moved the vehicle to free her arm from under the tire.”

Martinez didn’t call 911. Instead, he called members of both of their families “to tell them she was gone.” Several family members who went to the scene called 911 and attempted life-saving measures until the ambulance arrived. Martinez told agents he didn’t know what had happened to Suazo.

But following a “failed” polygraph on Nov. 22, 2021, her boyfriend, Santiago Martinez, made statements to FBI agents indicating “he pushed Suazo to the ground in front of her vehicle and then ran her over with it,” according to the appeal. 

Martinez’s defense later argued these post-polygraph statements were inadmissible evidence since he had only been read his Miranda Rights before the polygraph test and not prior to the post-polygraph interview. The district court agreed.

Now, however, the appellate court has reversed the suppression of Martinez's post-polygraph statements, holding that Martinez being read his Miranda Rights just once before his polygraph test was sufficient. The court has also reversed the suppression of text messages sent between Suazo and Martinez in the days leading up to her death.

The text messages show Suazo tried to end their relationship several times, despite the fact that Martinez stated they were on “good terms.”

"I am officially breaking up with you," Suazo texted on Sept. 9, 2021, according to the appeal. "I would say this in person or even a call, but your aggressive behavior makes me tell you this via text. You can't handle your drink, you go above your limit each time and I end up as the 'bad person' for trying to help you monitor your drinking."

The appeal states, "These messages, spanning the six months before her death, are purported to be evidence that Suazo was unhappy with their relationship and wanted to end it. The Government argued that these messages were not hearsay … as they were not offered for the truth of the matter asserted but rather to show their effect on Martinez as the listener. The district court ruled these text messages inadmissible at trial.”

Lastly, the court reversed and remanded the exclusion of evidence detailing Martinez’s past domestic violence incidents, including two witness testimonies said to describe the defendant’s pattern of physically assaulting Suazo.

One witness interviewed by law enforcement at the scene described Suazo and Martinez’s relationship as “toxic,” according to the complaint.

Martinez was indicted with second-degree homicide in “Indian country.” Several pretrial motions were adjudicated and led to the three appeals reviewed by the appellate court.

The case has been remanded for further proceedings consistent with the appellate courts’ opinion.