Parties file flurry of motions, some novel, ahead of upcoming trial in Baldwin criminal case

May 11—Attorneys on both sides of the Alec Baldwin criminal case have maintained a steady tit-for-tat as his July 9 trial date approaches, including a barrage of filings that include new motions to dismiss, suppress evidence or add witnesses.

Many of the dozens of motions filed in the past few weeks are routine requests for subpoenas or to quash them, plus amended witness lists, requests for recording of court proceedings or drawn-out briefings of existing issues.

One wordy motion is entitled: "State of New Mexico's Response to the Defendants motion to strike the State's reply to the Defendant's motion for leave to file a supplemental response in opposition to Defendants motion to dismiss the indictment."

But there are several more novel filings as well.

Baldwin's team has filed two new motions seeking dismissal of the indictment against him, and special prosecutors Kari Morrissey and Erlinda Johnson have submitted a motion expressing their intent to add another person — an employee of the District Attorney's Office who would be on unpaid leave — to their team.

Baldwin is charged with involuntary manslaughter in the October 2021 shooting death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, who was struck by a bullet discharged from the revolver the actor-producer wielded during a walk-through of a scene of the movie Rust.

Baldwin has said he didn't pull the trigger and pleaded not guilty to the fourth-degree felony charge, which carries a penalty of up to 18 months in prison.

Baldwin's legal team already had one pending motion that asks the court to dismiss the grand jury indictment against him. Filed in February, it alleges prosecutors mishandled the grand jury proceedings by failing to present evidence and witnesses who could have provided evidence favorable to his case as required.

The court recently scheduled a hearing on the motion for Friday. Meanwhile, Baldwin's attorneys filed two more motions asking the court to dismiss the indictment on Monday.

One of the motions is based on prosecutors having allowed the revolver at the center of the case to be damaged during ballistics testing.

"The government took the most critical evidence in this case, the firearm — and destroyed it by repeatedly and pointlessly striking it with a mallet," the motion says. "Government agents knew that the firearm would not survive their clumsy 'tests' intact. ... But at the insistence of prosecutors eager to prove a celebrity's guilt, they nevertheless blundered ahead ... without informing Baldwin or his counsel they were conducting destructive testing; and without any realistic prospect that bludgeoning the gun would reveal whether Baldwin had pulled the trigger on the day of the accident."

The motion argues Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer should prohibit the state from presenting an argument or evidence at trial that Baldwin pulled the trigger and instruct the jury that he did not do so.

Another motion to dismiss alleges the charge should be dropped because "prosecutors have failed to state a criminal offense against Baldwin." His lawyers argue the state can't prove Baldwin had "a subjective awareness of a substantial risk that the firearm held live ammunition," and without such awareness he could not have committed the crime of involuntary manslaughter.

Among the more interesting motions filed by the state is one asking Sommer to clarify a previous ruling that District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies had to choose between appointing a special prosecutor to the case or working on it herself but could not do both.

Special prosecutors Kari Morrissey and Erlinda Johnson say in the motion they are seeking guidance on the issue because they "intend to seek the appointment of an assistant special prosecutor who will be on extended unpaid leave from the First Judicial District Attorney's Office and performing no work for the First Judicial District Attorney's Office in any capacity."

A DA's Office spokesman declined to comment, referring questions to Morrissey, who did not respond to an email requesting comment.

The filings — laced with accusations of sandbagging, gamesmanship and histrionics — portray a relationship between the prosecutors and defense attorneys that perhaps is more fraught than usual, even among parties who are by definition adversaries.

Baldwin's team refers to one of the state's legal briefs as a "32-page jeremiad," suggesting a prolonged lamentation or angry harangue.

For their part, special prosecutors filed a motion May 6 at 9:20 p.m., seeking to excluded witnesses on an amended witness list filed by Baldwin team at 5:48 p.m. that day. Morrissey's team contended Baldwin's filing came too late, citing an order that states "no party may file an amended witness list to add new witnesses after May 6, 2024."