New trial for Cleo Juan still a question

Cleo Juan

By Bill Donovan
Staff writer

GALLUP — The question of whether a Gallup woman, looking at a life sentence in the death of a 18-month-old boy in her care, will get a new trial is still up in the air.
New Mexico District Court Judge Grant Foutz, after a three-hour hearing Friday, said he would rule on the question early next week.

Attorneys for Cleo Juan argued Friday that Juan deserved a new trial and that McKinley County District Attorney Karl Gillson and his staff should no longer be involved in the prosecution.

Juan was convicted by a Gallup jury on Feb. 1 of child abuse leading to death of a child under the age of 12 in connection with the death of Colby Shirley, who died in March 2007 from head trauma which prosecutors said was caused by Juan shaking him severely. Under state law, she would have to serve at least 30 years before she could be granted parole.

Although very few family members showed up during her trial, more than 40 relatives and friends were on hand for Friday’s hearing.

Some were there to testify on Juan’s behalf because of her claims, made public only after she was convicted, that she and Gillson were second cousins and therefore his office should not have been involved in the prosecution. Gillson has denied knowing anything about the alleged relationship. He waited in the hallway in case he was called to testify but the prosecution rested without calling any witnesses.

It was at that point that Foutz denied the first motion and allowed Gillson and his staff to continue prosecuting the case.

It was the second motion, dealing with a request from Juan’s attorneys, that he took under advisement.

This motion has two parts.

The first is based on the relationship between Juan and Gillson, saying Juan should have a new trial because they are related.

The second deals with the attempt by Juan’s attorney during her trial to allow the jury the opportunity to consider a lesser included offense instead of the one she was convicted on. Foutz rejected this motion during the trial. If he had approved it, the jury would also have been given the opportunity to find her not guilty of the charge she was convicted on but guilty of child abuse not leading to death.

This would have given her a three-year sentence.