Rust armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed’s lawyers file a motion to dismiss her conviction

Embed from Getty Images
Early last year, Rust armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed was charged with involuntary manslaughter for the death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins back in October 2021. Hannah’s trial began in late February of this year, she was convicted two weeks later, and in May, Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer gave Hannah the maximum possible sentence of 18 months in prison, where she is now. Then last week happened. Alec Baldwin’s trial for the same charge began before the same judge last Tuesday, and by Friday the entire case was dismissed because the prosecution (inexplicably) failed to disclose evidence to the defense. Anyone who’s seen My Cousin Vinny knows, “it’s called disclosure you d–khead!” Now, as expected, Hannah’s lawyers have filed a motion to dismiss her conviction:

Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, the Rust armorer who was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the October 2021 on-set fatal shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, is seeking to dismiss her conviction or have a new trial after Alec Baldwin’s criminal case was dismissed mid-trial.

In court documents filed in New Mexico on Tuesday, July 16, and obtained by PEOPLE, Gutierrez-Reed’s attorneys Jason Bowles and Monica L. Barreras sent a motion to the court asking for the armorer to either receive a new trial or have her conviction dismissed in the wake of “an egregious discovery violation” made by New Mexico’s special prosecutors.

Baldwin’s case was dismissed in a surprise twist on Friday, July 12 after the actor’s attorneys argued the prosecution buried evidence related to the case without the defense’s knowledge. Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer, who also presided over Gutierrez-Reed’s criminal trial, dismissed Baldwin’s case with prejudice, meaning Baldwin, 66, cannot be charged with involuntary manslaughter again.

Gutierrez-Reed’s attorneys argued in this new motion that prosecutors “withheld bombshell exculpatory evidence that it had a constitutional obligation to disclose and that would have resulted in a fundamentally different trial,” for the armorer, who was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in Hutchins’ death on March 6.

Gutierrez-Reed was in charge of prop weapons on the Western movie Rust, which Baldwin, 66, starred in and co-produced, when a gun Baldwin was holding discharged and killed Hutchins, 42, on Oct. 21, 2021, in New Mexico. On April 15, Gutierrez-Reed received the maximum sentence of 18 months of incarceration at a New Mexico women’s correctional facility. She was separately cleared on a separate charge of tampering with evidence during that trial.

Gutierrez-Reed’s attorneys are asking the court to outright dismiss her conviction or grant her a new trial in light of misconduct discovered during Baldwin’s trial, per court documents obtained by PEOPLE. They also asked that the court alternatively release Gutierrez-Reed pending an appeal and that special prosecutor Kari T. Morrissey be removed from the case.

Despite Gutierrez-Reed’s new motion, Emily D. Baker, a legal expert and former Los Angeles district attorney, tells PEOPLE the movie’s armorer “is in a much different position” to have her case dismissed or receive a new trial.

“With the swiftness of that conviction and the evidence, including Hannah’s own statements to police that she loaded the weapon, I don’t know if any of this coming forward would change the jury result that she didn’t do her job as the armorer,” Baker says. “The position of Baldwin was much stronger. Hannah’s position to get released and to get this overturned is not as good as Baldwin’s. It’s a much weaker argument for her.”

[From People]

So her defense lawyers are asking for Hannah’s conviction to be dismissed or at least retried, and they want the prosecutor off the case, oh and Hannah should be sprung from prison in the interim. Have I got all that right? Defense attorneys are gonna defend, I get that, and at this point the prosecution should also want a new lead attorney based on how badly Kari Morrissey bungled the other case. But Hannah’s attitude and behavior have been so off-putting that I hate the idea she could finagle her way out, here. Instead of taking real responsibility, she’s complained about how her own life has been affected. Other lives have been affected, too, like the lives of Halyna Hutchins, her family and friends.

Earlier this week I was more convinced that her conviction would be overturned, on the same Brady violation issue as Alec Baldwin. But between this reporting, and the thorough timelines y’all laid out in the comments, I’m more encouraged now that her conviction will stand. Back when the ruling came down in March, jurors were pretty clear that Hannah’s inconsistent safety checks on set were a big factor in their decision. If that’s so, then Judge Sommer can say that the withheld evidence from Alec’s trial would likely not have changed the outcome of Hannah’s case.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

17 Responses to “Rust armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed’s lawyers file a motion to dismiss her conviction”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Enis says:

    I fall pretty hard on the “Hannah is terrible” side of things, but given what I saw in the Baldwin trial, she deserves a new trial. Even the most vile people still deserve to have their rights respected.

    • ML says:

      Prefacing this with I don’t know enough about the law and where it intersects with the withholding of evidence here… I feel similarly to you. I don’t believe that she was competent, nor did she show any real remorse. However, if she didn’t get a fair trial, that could effect innocent people in a similar situation, so from that viewpoint it might be better to retry her.

    • pottymouth pup says:

      Yeah, I can see a new trial since prosecutorial misconduct is reprehensible but I’m not sure this evidence really exculpates her. It was still her responsibility to ensure no live rounds were placed in the gun and that it remained safe for use for the duration, including once it got in Baldwin’s hands. I’d think that fact that a live round was also found in a gun given the Jensen Ackles would make her look worse and that everyone’s very lucky that there wasn’t an additional tragic gun event on that set

  2. JP says:

    So, they’re saying someone else brought live ammunition onto the set and loaded it into prop guns?

    • Danbury says:

      That’s what I don’t get… why haven’t they gotten to the bottom of that yet? That’s the craziest part of this whole story.

    • pottymouth pup says:

      even if someone else brought the live rounds and loaded the prop guns, wasn’t it her responsibility to ensure the safety of those prop guns, check to make sure there were no live rounds loaded and maintain the integrity/chain of custody for the duration of time the guns were being used?

  3. Cheshire Sass says:

    I’m going to go on the side of hard ass here – She should be thanking her lucky stars she got such a gift of a light sentence in the first place. She’s the professional armourer – She should not have had live bullets on set. Whether she loaded the gun or had someone else – She was in charge of the weapons. Not toys – if she doesn’t know the difference between “live” and dummy bullets then she had no business in that profession. It is not something you ever fool around with. My father was a hunter. He had a lot of weaponry. He made sure we all proper knowledge of handling them. He was extremely strict about it as he should have been. There were NO lax moments. A woman died because of her extreme lack of professional handling. Halyna’s family has no second trial. They only have their memories. If she get’s the second trial, I think the gift of light sentencing opportunity should be removed.

    • Flamingo says:

      The 18 months was the maximum the Judge could give her under sentencing guidelines in New Mexico. So, to say it is light is misleading, since in reality. The Judge threw the book at her as she has no prior criminal history. And most importantly, the sentence will keep her from ever owning guns legally again. To me is the most important part of this. Overturning or dismissing her case will let her own and work with guns again. Not that Hollywood would ever hire her again.

      Also, Jason is standing on the photos he was shown did not look like the bullets that were in evidence. And they did look similar to the rust bullets. There was also an interview with Seth Kenney he was not aware of. If those bullets have the same gunpowder as bullet that killed Halyna and they can tie it back to Seth Kenney. That would change things. As the sabotage theory has floated that he mixed live bullets on set to get Hannah fired. And Sarah threw away bullets (never tested) that may have been live also. They also cut deals to turn state’s evidence in the trials. So, Kari was motivated to not charge them with anything.

      There is just a lot of muddy water here. I don’t believe Hannah’s case should be dismissed. But she may have a shot at a new trial.

      Which again, will be more misery for the family to endure.

      • Cheshire Sass says:

        Clearly I have strong feelings about this and although I cognitively understand sentencing guidelines – I still believe she received a “gift” of a light sentence. As Halyna and her family received a death sentence. No reversals, no second chance.

    • jill says:

      100% agree. Obviously this doesn’t factor into any of this but one of the things that absolutely disgusts me about this case is how smug and inconvenienced she acts. The difference between her and Baldwins behavior is striking. He has been destroyed since the moment Hutchins was killed. She hasn’t seem all that affected except to cry that it wasn’t her fault and to try and point the finger at someone else. Plus she wanted to bring live bullets on set just to fire for fun. She’s incompetent and acts like a child. I have absolutely no sympathy for her. Making sure the weapons were safe was her JOB and she failed in the worst possible way.

      • Lulu says:

        Playing devil’s advocate – as I am kind of torn on this. Does being unlikeable mean the law is applied more harshly? If Hanna believes she was set up (even if farfetched) by Seth Kenny and not responsible for the live ammo being on the set, then why would she show remorse?

  4. Lucy says:

    I still don’t understand how the evidence that got Baldwin off is so exonerating. A box of bullets just dropped off at the police station? There’s no chain of custody, how do they know that isn’t manufactured evidence in the three years since? I get that the prosecutor intentionally hid it, I just don’t understand why this evidence is immediately accepted on face value.

    Anyway, I think this girl should just do her time. With the way good behavior and prison crowding seem to go, she could be out of there in a few more months, without the $$$$ all these appeals will cost. And she’d look like a slightly better human. To me, if she knew there was any live ammo on set she’s culpable for any results of that. Because that was her actual job.

    • Flamingo says:

      It’s not exonerating, he was not exonerated. His case got dismissed for being unfair. It’s not Kari’s call to say what is and isn’t evidence in a trial. The defense team was unaware never given the chance to test the bullets. And if it wasn’t for the ‘Good Samaritan’ coming forward. They never would have known about it. Personally, I think it was Teske or Bowles who tipped them off about it. Since if the sabotage theory is put out there. That they were mixed in to get Hannah fired by Seth. And would have been up to the jury to decide if the evidence had merit or not. And that never happened.

      Those bullets could have been tested to see if the gunpowder was the same as used in the bullet that killed Halyna. And if they can tie it to Seth did, he put those bullets in dummy boxes and Hannah either didn’t check them or since they looked the same thought they were dummy rounds.

      I hate to say it, but I think she will get a new trial.

      I hope there is some proof on how the evidence got put in a new case #. Since Hancock under oath said Kari was aware the evidence was in a new case #. And under oath. Kari claimed she had no idea they were under a new case #. Who’s the liar?

      My gut was telling me Hancock was lying to cover her buttocks for screwing up so badly. Trying to salvage her career.

      • Lulu says:

        Exactly why I’ve heard some lawyers advising against Baldwin filing a civil suit. The charges were not dismissed on merit, he got lucky so take the win and don’t spend years and money on a civil suit he might not win.

  5. UpIn Toronto says:

    I feel terrible for Halayna Hutchinson’s family. They are not going to receive any justice

    • Lulu says:

      Halayna’s family didn’t receive justice when Dave Hall was given a sweetheart plea deal with no jail time. He called out Cold Gun without checking the gun.

    • Flamingo says:

      and the fact that the Rust production team and Alec have not honored their civil settlements. And have not paid them a dime of the financial settlement. They are getting screwed both civilly and criminal cases.

      I hope that little boy and his father have a good support team around them to keep them going.