State District Judge Jason Lidyard refused to accept a plea agreement Thursday for one of two brothers charged with killing three people near Dixon in 2018, saying he didn’t want to be bound to the sentence agreed to by lawyers in the case.

His ruling drew harsh criticism from First Judicial District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies, who called it “a disservice to the pursuit of justice, and particularly to the families involved.”

Under the terms of the proposed agreement, Roger Gage, 36, would have pleaded guilty to three counts of first-degree murder and one count of aggravated battery, and the sentences for the murder counts would have run concurrently — meaning with good-time credit, he could have been eligible for parole after serving just over 32 years in prison.

Gage and his brother John Powell, 37, were caught on surveillance video shooting April Browne, 42; Abraham Martinez, 36; and Kierin Guillemin, 27, in Browne’s home in the small village of Cañoncito, a few miles from Dixon.

A Rio Arriba County jury convicted Powell in September, but he has not yet been sentenced.

Prosecutors have said the brothers planned the murders to steal heroin, methamphetamine and money from Browne.

During Powell’s trial, jurors saw surveillance footage of Powell and his brother shooting the victims at close range in Browne’s home and stealing a safe from her bedroom.

Carmack-Altwies and Gage’s defense attorney, Tom Clark, both said they were surprised by the judge’s decision.

“We were sandbagged,” Carmack-Altwies said in a phone interview after Gage’s plea hearing. “We sent that signed plea paperwork to Judge Lidyard on April 28. He had two weeks to let us know if he had an issue or questions with it. He did not.”

Lidyard did not respond to a message seeking comment Thursday.

Carmack-Altwies said her office agreed to run the three life sentences concurrently to encourage Gage to take a plea in the case, to recognize he was willing to take responsibility for the killings and to spare the victims’ families from having to go through another trial.

“This probably means we have to go to trial and re-traumatize the victims and they have to watch their family members murdered on HD video again,” she said. “Because what else can we offer? It was a life sentence. We don’t have the death penalty in this state, so we can’t give a bigger sentence than that.”

Browne’s sister, Jessica Duckworth McKeon, issued a statement Thursday, writing the family was disappointed Lidyard didn’t accept the plea agreement and “allow us to move on from the horror of this story, although we are certain he has his reasons. It is unfortunate that all of the families will have to go through another trial when the second person has already admitted his guilt but we are confident justice will be served.”

In a statement issued after the hearing, Carmack-Altwies said the judge had ample opportunity before the hearing to express any reservations he had with the proposed plea.

“If Judge Lidyard had concerns with the carefully considered, trauma-informed plea, it would have been simple to send an email or schedule a hearing to outline his concerns, rather than rejecting the plea this morning and denying the families of the victims closure,” she wrote in an email.

“The victims’ families were very clear with us that they do not want to go through another trial,” the district attorney wrote. “The last one was traumatic for them, and they whole-heartedly agreed that this plea was justice in their eyes.”

Clark said the plea would have given Gage some possibility of being released from prison in his lifetime. If Gage is convicted at trial, and if the judge decides to impose multiple life sentences to run consecutively, there will be little chance of that.

Gage’s case is scheduled to go to trial in June. Powell is set to be sentenced in July.

(6) comments

Grace Trujillo

30 plus years for three murders. What kind of deal is that!!! They should have a jury trial. The DAs office just don't want to take the time, but these men deserve life without parole. Do your jobs!

Augustin de la Sierra

Interesting. The family of at least one of the victims is satisfied. Prosecution and defense counsel were satisfied. Now this appears to be going to trial on the taxpayers' dime.

The DA is annoyed because the judge gave no chance for discussion. This sounds reasonable, again especially because of the cost to the taxpayer of a trial.

Judge Lidyard is not a UNM law school grad; a good sign. Still, what is he thinking (and on your and my tax dollars)?

John Cook

Judges are often faced with hard decisions with no real 'right' answer. This isn't one of those cases. Think about a jury looking at this insane drug mess which resulted in these murders. A jury won't find these victims to be innocent. Then consider that the DA didn't agree to a plea without consulting the families of the victims and without considering the difficulties in front of a jury. 32 years before parole is considered? The judge should reconsider.

Dan Chase

Lidyard was a crappy prosecutor who was lenient to drug offenders and here he show his incompetence. His little harry potter glasses don’t make him smart. He’s an idiot!

Craig Meyer

It is a violation of the separation of powers for an executive official like a District Attorney to set the sentence. That is a judicial function. They can recommend, even strongly recommend, a sentence but it's up to the judge and whatever the statute says. I've seen judges turn down this kind of compulsory sentence many times.

Maria Roybal Martinez

What about this? Too formal? Too nice? Too detailed?

Sorry Craig, you’re wrong and misunderstanding how pleas/sentencing agreements work and what happened here. It’s not a compulsory sentence set by the DA. It is a negotiated sentence (in this case, a life sentence plus 9 years) that is agreed upon by the parties that the Judge must accept as part of the plea agreement or otherwise reject the plea, which is what this judge did. Similarly, the parties to a plea can negotiate a sentencing range for the judge to impose or “open” sentencing where the judge has full discretion to impose whatever sentence they deem appropriate. The judge has the authority to do what he did here, it’s just that he disregarded the determination by the DA, the defendant/his attorney, and the families of the people that were murdered that this was a just outcome.

Welcome to the discussion.

Thank you for joining the conversation on Please familiarize yourself with the community guidelines. Avoid personal attacks: Lively, vigorous conversation is welcomed and encouraged, insults, name-calling and other personal attacks are not. No commercial peddling: Promotions of commercial goods and services are inappropriate to the purposes of this forum and can be removed. Respect copyrights: Post citations to sources appropriate to support your arguments, but refrain from posting entire copyrighted pieces. Be yourself: Accounts suspected of using fake identities can be removed from the forum.