Court Denies State’s Motion for Pretrial Detention in State v. Busfield

In January 2026, the State of New Mexico sought the extraordinary remedy of pretrial detention in State v. Busfield, asking the Court to jail Timothy Busfield pending trial. After a full adversarial hearing, the Court denied that request and ordered Mr. Busfield released on his own recognizance, subject to conditions.

Under Article II, Section 13 of the New Mexico Constitution and Rule 5-409 NMRA, detention before trial is permitted only where the State proves, by clear and convincing evidence, that no conditions of release can reasonably protect the safety of others or the community. Allegations alone do not meet that standard, and pretrial detention should be the exception, rather than the rule.

Fayerberg Dodd opposed the State’s motion with a substantial evidentiary submission directed squarely at the constitutional test. The defense filed a comprehensive response supported by twenty-eight exhibits, including affidavits from cast and crew members who worked on the film set at issue, materials from an independent studio investigation, expert evaluations, and objective risk-assessment evidence. The Court also received more than eighty letters of supportfrom individuals with long-standing personal and professional knowledge of Mr. Busfield. The submission further included a voluntary polygraph examination and recorded statements of the twin boys, each of whom told an investigating officer that Mr. Busfield never touched them inappropriately.

After reviewing the record and hearing testimony, the Court applied the Rule 5-409 factors and concluded that while the allegations were serious, the weight of the evidence was neutral, citing the absence of corroboration and the lack of any criminal history. Because the State did not meet its clear-and-convincing burden, the Court denied pretrial detention and ordered Mr. Busfield's release.

The detention hearing illustrates why constitutional process matters, particularly in cases that attract public attention. Pretrial detention is not imposed by accusation or publicity; it requires reliable proof and individualized judicial findings. The Constitution does not bend to publicity, and it does not permit punishment before conviction.

As this case proceeds, Fayerberg Dodd will continue to insist that constitutional rights be respected at every stage of the process and that the State—from grand jury proceedings through trial.

A recording of the hearing is available below.

Recording of the January 20, 2026 hearing on the State’s motion for pretrial detention in State v. Busfield.