The prior drunken-driving conviction on the record of the man accused of causing the accident that killed four teenagers last month could be worth 20 extra years of prison time if he is found guilty of the current charges against him.

However, prosecutors could have an uphill battle on their hands trying to prove the validity of that conviction because it was handled by former Santa Fe Municipal Judge Frances Gallegos. Several drunken-driving convictions handed down by Gallegos during her 10 years on the bench have been successfully challenged by defense lawyers over the last few years on the grounds that the judge didn't adequately advise defendants of their constitutional rights.

"This is never going to hold up," said Tom Clark, a local defense attorney who has successfully challenged at least one Gallegos DWI conviction, after he looked at Scott Owens' Municipal Court file detailing his 2001 DWI conviction.

Donna Bevacqua-Young, a veteran area DWI prosecutor, also examined the file recently at the request of a reporter and disagreed with Clark.

"I would argue that's a good prior for enhancement purposes," she said.

Deputy District Attorney Doug Couleur said he is looking at the prior conviction but hasn't made any decision on it. Owens' attorney, Dan Cron, who has also successfully challenged prior Gallegos DWI convictions, said Tuesday that he hasn't seen Owens' Municipal Court file yet and declined to comment.

Owens, 27, is charged with driving in the wrong lane of Old Las Vegas Highway in the early morning hours of June 28, and crashing into a car carrying five local teens. The four passengers in the car were killed instantly, while the driver is recuperating from serious injuries at an Albuquerque hospital.

Owens' blood-alcohol content nearly four hours after the crash was 0.16, twice the legal driving limit, while tests showed the teen driver who survived hadn't been drinking.

Owens has been charged with four counts of vehicular homicide and one count of causing great bodily injury by vehicle. If found guilty of those charges, he would face a maximum of 27 years in prison. However, because he has a previous DWI within the last 10 years, he can be sentenced to an additional four years per count, according to state habitual offender laws.

That means Owens could face a maximum of 47 years behind bars.

Owens' previous DWI occurred in June 2001, when he was 19 years old. He was pulled over at the time by a Santa Fe police officer for racing a 2000 Chevrolet Camaro in his 2000 Ford F-250 pickup near the intersection of Cerrillos Road and St. Francis Drive, according to Municipal Court records. His blood-alcohol content at the time was 0.15, and he was charged with DWI and racing on streets.

Records show he was arraigned in Municipal Court on July 18, 2001, where he pleaded guilty to the DWI charge and no contest to the racing-on-streets charge. Judge Gallegos then dismissed the racing charge and ordered Owens to pay $535 in fines and fees, to attend DWI school, perform community service and be on unsupervised probation for one year.

She ordered him to spend one day in jail, though she gave him credit for the one day he'd already served when he was arrested. Owens also had to wear a pink hat while performing community service, a standard punishment from Gallegos, according to court records.

Bevacqua-Young said she thinks the conviction would stand up in court because Owens' file includes a signed waiver of appointed attorney, which also says Gallegos advised him of the charges against him and penalties he could be subjected to. In addition, she pointed out that Owens' judgment and sentence document includes a check mark that says he was advised of "all rights and penalties." Finally, another part of the record indicates he waived counsel.

"I don't think every (Gallegos) DWI can be challenged," she said.

Clark, on the other hand, argued that the waiver of appointed attorney in Owens' file cannot be valid because, though he signed it, it is not dated. The other part of the record that indicates he waived a lawyer is dated wrongly, Clark pointed out. Lastly, the file doesn't include a plea agreement, which would set out all the rights Owens would have to have been advised of, he said.

"This waiver of counsel is never going to fly," Clark said. "We're talking about giving this guy 20 years. This needs to be right."

The challenges to Gallegos' DWI record go back to a 2000 DWI conviction against a man named Edward Santana. State District Judge Stephen Pfeffer ruled in July 2004 that Santana's 2000 Municipal Court conviction couldn't stand because he wasn't advised of his rights when he pleaded guilty in Gallegos' courtroom about two weeks after he was arraigned.

The state Court of Appeals and the state Supreme Court both upheld Pfeffer's ruling. The case meant the difference between Santana's third DWI and fourth DWI. Defendants who are charged with a fourth DWI face felony punishments under New Mexico law.

However, there's another case that also likely will apply to Owens. That one involves a chronic DWI offender named Lori Pacheco, who challenged two of her three prior Municipal Court DWI convictions in 2004 based on the precedent set in the Santana case.

But in that case, Pfeffer ruled that Pacheco's two prior convictions were valid because Pacheco, unlike Santana, pleaded guilty at arraignment. Gallegos testified during a 2004 District Court hearing on the Santana case that she advised defendants of their constitutional rights during arraignment. Pfeffer upheld Pacheco's convictions because he felt the advisement of rights at arraignment was adequate. That decision was later upheld by the state Court of Appeals, according to court records.

Contact Jason Auslander at 986-3076 or :jauslander@sfnewmexican.com.