LAS VEGAS (KTNV) — A former Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department officer convicted of first-degree murder just had his conviction vacated.
U.S. District Court Judge Kent J. Dawson ordered Ronald Mortensen, the former police officer, is entitled to a new trial.
Mortensen was found guilty in May 1997 of first-degree murder with the use of a deadly weapon for the killing of Daniel Mendoza.
On appeal, Mortensen argued his due process rights were violated for a number of reasons, two of which Dawson agreed with in his order overturning Mortensen's conviction.
Order Vacated by aroberts.news on Scribd
The case involved Mortensen and another officer, Chistopher Brady, who were both off-duty at the time of the fatal shooting.
FROM THE ARCHIVES | See community reactions to the arrest for the killing of Daniel Mendoza:
On Dec. 27, 1996, Brady allegedly drove his truck recklessly through a neighborhood and testified he and Mortensen "thought they could get away with harassing" the "bangers and the dopers and the people in the neighborhood" because they were "nasty people."
Brady claimed Mortensen pointed a handgun out the window and fired several shots while Brady drove away from the area. Mortensen claimed Brady was responsible for the shooting but had used Mortensen's gun because he couldn't reach his own.
Investigators testified that Brady's fingerprints were not on the firearm, and eyewitnesses identified Mortensen as the gunman.
Mortensen was found guilty and sentenced on July 25, 1997 to serve two consecutive terms of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
FROM THE ARCHIVES | Watch Channel 13 archival footage from the trial of Ronald Mortensen:
In an order filed Monday, Dawson determined Mortensen is entitled to a new trial, first, because state prosecutors did not fulfill their burden to prove each element of first-degree murder (premeditiation, deliberation and willfulness). Specifically, Dawson found prosecutors didn't adequately instruct the jury on the element of deliberation.
Dawson also sided with Mortensen's argument that the state had suppressed some evidence that could have supported his defense. The state allegedly had evidence that Brady had told another Metro officer he "wanted to conduct a drive-by shooting." Dawson determined that evidence, if presented to the jury, could have been in Mortensen's favor.
