Santa Fe D.A. Affirms Support for ‘Rust’ Prosecutor Kari Morrissey After Alec Baldwin Case Thrown Out

Luis Sánchez Saturno/The New Mexican

The district attorney in Santa Fe, N.M., has affirmed her support for “Rust” prosecutor Kari Morrissey, after the manslaughter case against Alec Baldwin was dismissed Friday due to withheld evidence.

Morrissey remains in her role as the special prosecutor handling two cases against Hannah Gutierrez Reed, the “Rust” armorer who was convicted of manslaughter in March and is now serving an 18-month prison term.

Morrissey, a private attorney, was appointed by the D.A. in March 2023 to handle the criminal cases stemming from the fatal shooting of “Rust” cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.

Gutierrez Reed’s defense lawyer is seeking a new trial, claiming that evidence was also withheld in her case. Gutierrez Reed also faces an additional trial on a felony charge for bringing a gun into a bar.

“There is no better advocate than Kari Morrissey to see the Hannah Gutierrez Reed cases through, and her appointment and oath are still in place,” Mary Carmack-Altwies, the First Judicial District Attorney, said in a statement on Monday.

Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer dismissed the case against Baldwin with prejudice, meaning it cannot be refiled. The decision followed a surprise revelation that the state had failed to inform the defense about a cache of bullets that had been turned into the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office.

At an extraordinary daylong hearing, Morrissey called herself to the stand to argue that the bullets were not relevant to the case. The judge disagreed, finding the prosecution “highly culpable” for failing to share the information with Baldwin’s lawyers.

The second special prosecutor on the Baldwin case, Erlinda Ocampo Johnson, resigned midway through the hearing. She has since explained that once she learned about the bullets, she wanted to voluntarily dismiss the case, but that Morrissey overruled her.

Even before the issue with the bullets came to light, Gutierrez Reed’s lawyer, Jason Bowles, was already signaling that he would seek a new trial over a different claim of withheld evidence.

Lucien Haag, a state firearms expert, did a report last August stating that Baldwin’s gun would only have fired with a pull of the trigger. He then filed two supplemental reports, which were not provided to Gutierrez Reed’s lawyer. In one of the reports, Haag noted “unexplained toolmarks” on the gun’s sear, which could have indicated damage to the gun’s firing mechanism.

At the Gutierrez Reed trial in February, Haag testified that he did not see any damage other than that incurred by FBI testing.

The supplemental reports came to light in April and May, as Baldwin’s lawyers prepared for their trial. In a filing on June 27, Bowles alleged that the state had withheld “bombshell exculpatory evidence,” and that Haag had perjured himself at trial by omitting any mention of the toolmarks.

Bowles sought to have Gutierrez Reed released from prison pending the outcome of a motion for a new trial. The state sought additional time to respond to the motion.

Haag has since reversed course, and now believes that the toolmarks likely were the result of the FBI testing. He has also been consistent that the toolmarks do not change his conclusion that the gun was functioning normally at the time of the shooting.

Morrissey has said that the failure to share the Haag supplemental reports with both defense teams was an oversight. At the hearing on Friday, she argued that the reports were not exculpatory for Gutierrez Reed.

“Hannah Gutierrez’ defense was that the gun worked perfectly,” she said. “The defense in Hannah Gutierrez was never interested in any evidence that there was an issue with the gun, because if there was an issue with the gun, it damaged their case… So they had no interest in that information.”

In his filing, Bowles said that if he had known about the toolmarks, he would have changed his strategy.

“Ms. Gutierrez-Reed would have had a sufficient evidentiary basis from which to argue that unexplained alterations to the firearm caused it to fire without anyone pulling the trigger — an unforeseeable intervening cause that rendered her conduct not legally responsible for Ms. Hutchins’ tragic death,” Bowles wrote. “Nor was she able to impeach Mr. Haag’s testimony with his prior inconsistent statements.”

Bowles has also said he will file another motion shortly that will include allegations pertaining to the bullet evidence that sunk the Baldwin trial last week.