Judge denies request to reinstate Patrick Howard sentence

This story has been updated with a statement from New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez.

This article discusses sexual assault against children. Help is available by contacting the La Piñon 24-hour hotline at 575-526-3437. 

The two former Las Cruces High School students who accused their agriculture teacher of sexual abuse could not be present for a hearing on his sentence. 

Both moved far away from Las Cruces as they moved from adolescence to early adulthood; but the experience of sexual abuse delivered at the hands of that teacher, Patrick Howard, has left both with scars felt daily, according to their testimony on Sept. 5.

“Something I’d like to make clear is the guilt that I have felt and continue to feel about speaking up over a criminal act that was done to me,” said one of the women, who spoke to the court via phone.

Years after the experience, the woman said the nightmares have lessened, but she still feels fear at other triggers. 

“I still carry and still am that 15-year-old girl who didn't understand what was going on. I'm speaking my truth today: to speak up for her, to look after her, to remind her that things get better, that she's strong and that I am worthy of respect,” she said. 

The other woman took the chance to condemn the process that brought everyone back into a courtroom. 

She said the sentence – about three years of probation and no requirement to register as a sex offender – was paltry compared to the lasting effects of his abuse. 

“I stand before you with a deep sense of frustration and disillusionment regarding this case. It's glaringly apparent that the legal system, while intended to deliver justice, has failed miserably in this instance,” she said in a statement delivered by her attorney. 

Both women and one of their mothers asked a judge to reinstate the remaining two years of probation. 

The judge said no. 

Howard, 61, was initially charged with three counts of criminal sexual contact with a minor and one count of battery in 2018. 

He pleaded guilty in 2021 to one count of criminal sexual contact with a minor and a count of battery.

A civil court also forced Howard to pay punitive damages to the former LCHS students who accused him of sexual assault following a series of settlements. 

Judge Douglas Driggers of the 3rd Judicial District Court sentenced Howard to five years probation and said he did not have to register as a sex offender – a sentence that prosecutors agreed to at the time. 

In March of 2024, Howard’s attorney, Jeep Darnell, requested Driggers terminate the probation sentences since Howard had complied with his requirements up to that point. Driggers agreed, as did prosecutors and parole officials at the time, ending Howard’s sentence after he served just over half of it. 

The former LCHS students who accused Howard, now adults, were not notified of this hearing, which violated the state Victims’ Rights Act. 

In May, New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez requested the state Supreme Court take the case away from Driggers and force another judge to reconsider suspending the sentence. 

The Supreme Court allowed the case to remain with Driggers but instructed him to reconsider the terminated sentence. 

The initial hearing in July was rescheduled because prosecutors failed to notify the two women again. However, during the Sept. 5 hearing, prosecutors argued that the law required Driggers to reinstate the sentence and that the law made no availability for a judge to suspend it in the first place. 

“The court is without authority to limit the probation or grant an early discharge,” prosecutor Richard Wellborn said at the hearing. 

But both Howard’s lawyer and Driggers disagreed, saying that the law did not require that. Darnell could not be reached for comment.

Attorney General voices outrage

Torrez expressed outrage Friday in a statement reacting to Driggers' decision.

“We strongly disagree with Judge Driggers’ decision to terminate probation for a convicted sex offender and will work with the District Attorney’s Office to file an immediate appeal,” he wrote. “Unfortunately, the disregard for the victim’s rights in this case is emblematic of a larger problem within New Mexico’s criminal justice system and highlights the urgent need for a new legal framework to give them the same kind of legal protection as other participants in the process. Victims of crime should not be treated as second class citizens, and we intend to do everything in our power to honor the extraordinary courage it takes for them to seek justice in this state.”