There is this semi-comical line in the famous movie Plan 9 From Outer Space, that reviewers like to make fun of. It goes like this:
"But one thing's sure. Inspector Clay is dead, murdered, and somebody's responsible."
Indeed someone would have to be.
So it is with the candidacy of Steven Michael Quezada, currently a Bernalillo County Commissioner. Somebody is responsible for his candidacy, but we can't figure out who that is. The only thing that certainly appears to be the case is that Quezada himself is not responsible.
The Problem is: Apparently No one Knows Who is Responsible for Quezada Actually Filing
Here's what we think we know about the newly installed Bernalillo County Commissioner:
March 8, 2016, was the filing date for primary elections. Bernalillo County candidates filed at the Office of the County Clerk in Albuquerque.
On March 8, 2016 Katherine Korte, an employee of the Bernalillo County Clerk's office, notarized a Declaration of Candidacy for Steven Michael Quezada. That may not be where the trouble begins, but it's certainly a part of the confusion.
What is a Declaration of Candidacy?
A Declaration of Candidacy is an affidavit, a sworn statement (wording shown at right) in which a qualified voter swears that he or she is eligible and legally qualified to hold the office for which he/she is filing.
It is an oath, sworn to in the presence of a notary public. Falsely signing the document is a felony.
People can file papers on behalf of candidates who cannot be present on filing day, and they can carry and transmit certain required documents that are mandatory for filing for office. However, the one document that must be signed by the candidate himself, and must be signed in front of a notary, is the Declaration of Candidacy. No one can sign that particular document on behalf of the candidate.
What about Steven Michael Quezada's Declaration of Candidacy?
It certainly appears that Steven Michael Quezada's Declaration of Candidacy is filled out either by his wife, or by an employee of the clerk's office named Katherine S. Korte.
According to witnesses who were supposedly present, the declaration was filled out entirely by Cherise Quezada, Steven Michael's wife. One problem (among many) for this filing is that the line for the signature on the oath has exactly the same script and handwriting as the printed name of the candidate.
In other words, it appears his wife printed his name and all the required information on the form, and then also printed her husband's name in lieu of letting him sign the oath.
(ADVERTISEMENT)
FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC
THINKING ABOUT RUNNING FOR OFFICE?
NEED HELP RESEARCHING PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES? BALLOT QUESTIONS?
WANT TO MAKE SURE YOUR LOBBYIST FILING IS CORRECT?
LOBBYIST EMPLOYERS?
QUESTIONS ABOUT CONTRIBUTIONS AND THE PROHIBITED PERIOD?
NEED HELP WITH A RECOUNT OR A CHALLENGE, OR OTHER ELECTIONS-RELATED ISSUES?
Contact Us at fccllc@terrcom.net
Helping candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs and lobbyists, navigate Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act and the many complexities of the Election Code in New Mexico.
If you want to make sure procedures are being followed, contact us!
Statewide Offices • Legislative Races • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Public Policy Issues and Research
Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net Full Compliance Consulting, LLC P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504
(ADVERTISEMENT)
Duties of a Notary Public
A problem for Korte is that a notary public is also, in essence, swearing that all the information contained on a notarized document is true. In other words she is essentially saying that:
1. Steven Michael Quezada appeared before me on this date;
2. Signed this document; and
3. I watched him do that right in front of me.
The problem is, by all accounts, none of those things is actually true.
Now there is Supposedly a Legal Case
We have found a case that is titled VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR CONTEST OF ELECTION. Patricia B. Paiz, Contestant, v. Steven Michael Quezada, Contestee. What appears to be the case number is D-202-CV-2016-07907.
Neither NMPJ nor anyone associated with our publication has spoken with any of the parties in the case, so what we are piecing together is our own interpretation of events,
One of the exhibits attached to the court case that we found is this statement from a handwriting expert:
I, Karen Fisher Weinberg QDE, after examination with the assistance of the transparencies I have also provided for you on most of the documents. The printing in Ql, I find in my expert opinion, Steven Michael Quezada did not print out the document. If you examine KJ and remove the transparence for comparison to Q1 you will see that in my expert opinion Steven Michael Quezada's wife Cherise D. Quezada filled out the 2016 Declaration of Candidacy. There is a case law in NM that states no one can not fill out documents or sign someone else's name without indicating their name first. Further I say not.
Okay then. This is awkwardly worded in several places, but she is essentially saying she is an expert on handwriting, and that Quezada did not fill out the document. Curiously, she doesn't say that the "signature" where the declarant is supposed to sign is not Quezada's, but she more or less implies that, and certainly casts doubt on the whole matter in a general sort of way.
Cherise Quezada's Handwriting v. Steven Michael's
As can be seen at right on her voter registration form and below in the Declaration of Candidacy (which she apparently also signed as the declarant), Cherise Quezada's handwriting is characterized by large, rounded, bulbous lettering. The documents appear to match.
.JPG)
On the left is a Declaration of Candidacy for Steven Michael Quezada, though as can be seen, it 
is not "signed" by him.
Rather, in the space where the signature is normally placed when signing the oath (above the word "Declarant") Quezada's name is merely printed again in the same handwriting as that contained in the entire document.
At right is a photo of Quezada proudly displaying a receipt for certain documents. But he is not displaying the Declaration of Candidacy.
As can be seen in the photo, there is a seal in the middle of the document—something not found in a Declaration of Candidacy (left). The time on the wall clock is 9:58, more than an hour before his Declaration of Candidacy was actually filed by Kathy Korte.
Shown at right is what Steven Quezada's signature supposedly looks like, although it is on the "13th" month of 2012 — again, he's had huge problems filing stuff. 
In any case, the signature looks nothing like anything on any other page in question.
Not the First Time: Quezada's Filing for School Board is all Screwed up Too!
We don't have space to go into the comical set of circumstances and events surrounding Quezada's filing for APS School Board in 2012. There are conflicting voter registration forms, conflicting addresses, conflicting districts he supposedly lived in, and again: allegations that his wife did all of the filing and signed all the paperwork. But that is another story for another day.
What Happens Now? New Mexico Justice: What is Likely to Happen?
By tradition and precedent, since Quezada is a registered Democrat, nothing is likely to happen. If he were a Republican his candidacy would have been nipped in the bud, EARLY, and he would've gone down smokin'.
Yes, if you're wondering, his opponents did take this to the authorities early on: The Attorney General (who would have smoked a Republican cabinet officer or candidate) punted it away and forgot about it. The Secretary of State (which, to be fair, probably doesn't have the authority to take decisive action) wouldn't even communicate with anyone on the issue, including the complainant.
But for a Democratic Party candidate, the only question is how creative the court will be in finding some kind of "reasoning" to hang its hat on and let the whole thing slide.
The problem is that it is obvious from the evidence that Quezada did not file.
It is also possible that an actual crime has been committed—by someone, perhaps multiple people in the County Clerk's office, or by Quezada or his wife. We aren't sure. Maybe it's only a civil matter. But it is plain that Quezada is not eligible for candidacy.
In any other state this would present a knotty legal and political problem, something that would leave a jurist worried about looking foolish, partisan, or corrupt. Alas, such worries aren't that keenly felt here. Our best guess is an attempt at a quiet dismissal with no opinion or legal reasoning offered, just a "nothing to see here" Land of Enchantment jurisprudence special. (Sort of a "I-got-your-ruling-right-here" announcement we have all seen so much of in this state.)
One Last Thing
As an aside, one more thing is obvious: Steven Michael Quezada lacks the very basic attention to detail voters have a right to expect in a public official. People don't want their representatives "Hollywooding it up."
They don't want them essentially saying, "Oh, let my wife or some clerks do this stuff, let me hobnob with folks at the county clerk's office while the little people file for me." No, they want them to be accountable, and to act like a normal candidate or voter would act.
Email us at: us with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.