CONEJOS — Santos Navares, 25, of La Jara, who also goes by the name, Santos Rameriz, along with other aliases, is set for a preliminary hearing in Conejos County Court Thursday, June 22 and Friday, June 23 on an array of charges relating to violent incidents at a Capulin home Jan. 15.
Navares fled the scene in an allegedly stolen vehicle and then was arrested and charged after the vehicle got stuck in deep snow.
He allegedly left three dead and one badly injured following a shooting spree just after 6 p.m. Sunday, Jan. 15.
Conejos deputies, Colorado State Patrol (CSP) Troopers, Manassa police, Antonito police and La Jara officers took him into custody on County Road AA, several miles west of the scene.
Navares (Rameriz) was taken to the Conejos County Sheriff’s Office and booked on the following charges:
Three counts of first degree murder with intent after deliberation; three counts of first degree murder with extreme indifference; one count of criminal attempt to commit first degree murder, with intent and after deliberation; one count of first degree assault with intent to cause bodily injury, causing serious bodily injury by means of a deadly weapon; one count of aggravated motor vehicle theft, using a vehicle in the commission of a crime other than a traffic offense and one count of felony menacing.
The Conejos County Sheriff reported deputies were dispatched to a residence at the edge of Capulin following reports on a shooting with four victims of gunshot wounds.
Guadalupe “Lupe” Cervantez had been celebrating his 57th birthday, beginning with a football game at the town bar, and moved the party to his home after the game ended. When deputies arrived, Cervantez and Jose M. “Joey” Archuleta, 54, were found dead at the scene.
A female identified as Marissa Luz Cervantez, 30, suffered serious injuries and was transported to a local hospital, then flown out to a Denver hospital, where she was pronounced dead at 10:55 p.m.
Don L. “Kinki” Martinez, 34, also suffered a gunshot wound, was transported to a local hospital and then flown out. He had a number of surgeries and is recovering.

Preliminary Hearing
The preliminary hearing is a screening device to afford the defendant an opportunity to challenge the sufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence to establish probable cause before an impartial judge.
As a screening device, the preliminary hearing is designed to weed out groundless or unsupported charges and insures that the prosecution can at least sustain the burden of proving probable cause.
It protects the accused by avoiding an embarrassing, costly and unnecessary trial and it benefits the interests of judicial economy and efficiency.
At a preliminary hearing, the prosecution has the burden of presenting enough evidence to the judge to establish to the satisfaction of the judge that there is probable cause to believe the defendant committed the crime.
Probable cause is established when the evidence is sufficient to induce a person of ordinary prudence and caution conscientiously to entertain a reasonable belief that the defendant may have committed the crime charged.
If the court is satisfied that probable cause exists, the court will bind over the case for arraignment.
If the court is not persuaded that probable cause exists, the court will dismiss the case.
The preliminary hearing is a screening device to afford the defendant an opportunity to challenge the sufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence to establish probable cause before an impartial judge. As a screening device, the preliminary hearing is designed to weed out groundless or unsupported charges and insures that the prosecution can at least sustain the burden of proving probable cause. It protects the accused by avoiding an embarrassing, costly and unnecessary trial and it benefits the interests of judicial economy and efficiency. At a preliminary hearing, the prosecution has the burden of presenting enough evidence to the judge to establish to the satisfaction of the judge that there is probable cause to believe the defendant committed the crime. Probable cause is established when the evidence is sufficient to induce a person of ordinary prudence and caution conscientiously to entertain a reasonable belief that the defendant may have committed the crime charged. If the court is satisfied that probable cause exists, the court will bind over the case for arraignment. If the court is not persuaded that probable cause exists, the court will dismiss the case.
The rules of evidence are relaxed at a preliminary hearing. The Colorado Rules of Evidence provide that the rules, except for the rules relating to privilege, do not apply at preliminary hearings. Hearsay evidence, conclusions and other evidence, which might not be admissible if offered at trial, may well be the bulk of the evidence at the preliminary hearing.
Certainly, in most cases, the prosecutor is better able to establish probable cause by calling the victim to testify at the preliminary hearing. But the prosecutor does not always have the victim testify. The victim may not be available or interested in a courtroom confrontation. In some cases, the victim may not have seen critical events. The prosecutor is only required to call a perceiving witness, i.e. any person(s) who has direct perception of the corpus delecti constituting the crime charged and the defendant as the perpetrator.
The prosecution does not meet its burden of establishing probable cause by introducing evidence solely from a non-perceiving witness who relates second-hand information. The evidence presented must have some semblance of a factual foundation and must show probable cause. The process is best served when at least one witness is called whose direct perception of the criminal episode is subject to evaluation by the judge.
The evidence presented must be viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution. If testimony conflicts, the trial court must draw an inference in favor of the prosecution. If more than one inference can be drawn from a particular piece of evidence, the court must draw the inference that is most favorable to the prosecution.
A judge has jurisdiction to consider the credibility of preliminary hearing witnesses only when as a matter of law the testimony is implausible or incredible. When there is a mere conflict in the testimony, a question of fact exists for the jury and the judge must draw the inferences favorable to the prosecution. A trial court commits reversible error when it resolved inferences arising from conflicting testimony in a preliminary hearing in the defendant’s favor.
The preliminary hearing is a crucial stage of the prosecution; therefore, the defendant has the right to assistance of counsel. The defendant has the right to cross-examine the witnesses called to testify against him and the right to introduce evidence on his own behalf. The court may not curtail cross-examination of a witness on testimony that is vital to the issue of probable cause.