Supreme Court halts release of sex offender from probation -- but victims can't celebrate just yet

Colleen Heild, Albuquerque Journal, N.M.
·2 min read

May 16—Convicted sex offender Patrick Howard of Las Cruces is back on supervised probation — at least for now.

The state Supreme Court on Wednesday heeded the request of state Attorney General Raul Torrez to halt a state district judge's order that ended Howard's five-year probation early.

Where the case goes from here wasn't certain on Thursday. The justices ruled only that the judge's order "shall be STAYED until further order of the Court."

Howard, a former science teacher at Las Cruces High School, pleaded guilty in 2021 to criminal sexual contact of a minor and battery involving two of his female high school students. State District Judge Doug Driggers of Las Cruces put him on five years of supervised probation and granted him a conditional discharge of his case if he successfully completed supervision.

But just weeks after a federal jury awarded one of his former students $44 million in damages, Driggers agreed with Howard's criminal defense attorney to end the probation two years early in a brief March 21 hearing in which victims weren't notified.

Torrez on Thursday said the Supreme Court could send the matter back to Driggers for further action or hold its own hearing on the legal issues raised.

Torrez cautioned it's not an "ultimate victory" for Howard's victims. The court could have denied the stay request, he added.

"I don't want to read too much into it. But the fact that we got this stay and it was issued really quickly signals to me and I think signals (to) those involved that there's something clearly wrong with the way the (district court) process unfolded."

His office contended that Driggers shouldn't have prematurely ended probation for Howard because he is a sex offender and should have been supervised for at least five years under the law.

The petition seeking the Supreme Court intervention also contended that the Victims of Crime Act was violated because the young women who said Howard inappropriately groomed and touched them weren't notified of the hearing and had no opportunity to speak at the hearing.

A recording of the probation hearing obtained by the Journal showed the judge agreed to end the probation early given the fact that Howard had successfully served more than 50% of the probationary period.