By Roger Lanse

On Tuesday, Aug. 3, 2021, Grant County Sheriff's Office deputies responded to 85 Ridge Road in reference to a shots fired complaint. Upon arrival, according to a GCSO release, deputies determined shots had been fired at the home.

Detectives, the release stated, found one victim, who was treated and transported by EMS then later flown out due to her injuries.

With a vehicle description and the assistance of the Bayard Police Department, the vehicle was stopped on Highway 180 near Grant County Airport Road and five subjects were detained, the release said. All five were arrested and charged.

Danielle Rose Marie Munoz, 20, of the Silver City Motel 6 was charged with attempted first degree murder – a capital offense, conspiracy to commit murder – a capital offense, tampering with evidence – a 2nd degree felony, and negligent use of a weapon – a petty misdemeanor. Rodney Luis Chavez, 27, of 451/2 Western Drive was charged with conspiracy to commit murder. Three juveniles were charged with conspiracy to commit murder.

The juveniles, according to the release, were to be transported out of county as Grant County does not have a juvenile holding facility, however when the juveniles were brought before Sixth Judicial District Court Judge James Foy, he refused to sign the order and had the juveniles released immediately.

The condition of the victim was not known at the time of the release.

According to Grant County Detention Center staff, Munoz and Chavez remain in custody.

CLARIFICATION:

Barry Massey, a spokesman for the Administrative Office of the Courts:

"A law enforcement officer called Judge James Foy on Aug. 3 seeking a determination of probable cause by the judge in order to detain juveniles taken into custody. Judge Foy found there was no probable cause. Under state law, when the court finds no probable cause to believe a juvenile committed an offense, the child must be released from custody."

Also, the three juveniles did not appear in front of the judge. The story wrongly appears to indicate that happened when it states 'the juveniles were brought before...' the judge. The story also states that the judge "refused to sign the order." That is incorrect. As explained above, the judge found no probable cause for the juveniles to be detained at that time.

Here also is an update:
One of the juveniles, as a result of a probation violation in a separate case, is now being held in custody in that matter after a hearing and decision by the judge today.