photo by: Chris Conde/Journal-World

Alejandro Martinez-Diaz appears at a jury trial on April 12, 2022. The trial was continued to a later date after a key witness refused to testify.

A jury trial in a first-degree attempted murder case was derailed Tuesday after a key witness for the prosecution refused to testify and was held in contempt, prompting an unusual chain of events in a Douglas County courtroom.

The trial was for Alejandro Martinez-Diaz, 19, of Lawrence, who has been charged with shooting a young woman on May 27, 2021. Martinez-Diaz is accused of shooting Caylee Nehrbass after chasing her and her boyfriend, Javier I. Romero, 18, of Lawrence, through North Lawrence and opening fire on the car with a handgun.

The witness who refused to testify Tuesday was Romero. He previously testified in a preliminary hearing last November, and prosecutors planned to bring him back to tell a jury what happened on that night, but in a pretrial conference on Friday between Senior Assistant District Attorney Seth Brackman, defense attorney Dakota Loomis and Romero, Romero changed his mind about testifying in the trial and claimed he would be put into a position to perjure himself if he were to testify, Brackman told the court.

photo by: Journal-World File

Pictured at left is Javier Romero, 18. At right is the Douglas County Judicial and Law Enforcement Center.

Before the jury was brought into the courtroom Tuesday, Brackman and Senior Assistant District Attorney Nicholas Vrana asked the court to compel Romero to testify or at least give an explanation as to why he thought he would perjure himself if he took the stand.

Judge Kay Huff asked Romero why he believed he would perjure himself.

Romero, in jail attire and ankle chains, took the witness stand but hesitated before he was sworn in. Romero is in custody in an unrelated case on a charge of first-degree murder.

“I am a bit nervous about this. My attorney isn’t even in here,” Romero told the court.

Huff agreed that Romero should have his attorney present and called for defense attorney Loomis, who was apparently in another hearing at the time.

“You’re right; we’ll wait,” Huff said.

Vrana told the judge that it would take five minutes for Loomis to arrive. But efforts to locate Loomis took longer.

“The five minutes Mr. Vrana has stated has passed; let me know when the state is ready,” Huff eventually said.

The judge then abruptly returned to her chamber, and another 15 minutes passed before Loomis arrived.

When Loomis did arrive, Vrana attempted to question Romero about his testimony.

“Can you please state your name?” Vrana said as he began his line of questioning.

Romero refused to give his name. Huff then ordered Romero to answer the question and said that he could not perjure himself by saying his name.

Romero remained silent. Huff said that if he refused to answer even the simplest of questions that she would hold him in contempt. She then asked him why he refused to answer. Romero looked at the judge and raised his hands in a shrug.

“I find you in contempt of court,” Huff said. “Let the record show he held up his hands.”

The judge then explained to Romero that the time he is in jail after being held in contempt would not count toward time served in any case and that he would be in jail for contempt until he agreed to answer the court’s question.

This is the second time that Romero has been held in contempt in this case. In October, Huff held him in contempt after he refused to testify at a preliminary hearing. However, Romero did eventually provide testimony weeks later.

After Romero was found in contempt on Tuesday, he was ushered out of the courtroom, and Huff ordered Loomis to answer for his client’s actions.

Loomis said that Romero was afraid that he would perjure himself if he were to testify in open court and that he had chosen to invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Huff asked Loomis why Romero thought he would perjure himself and if he thought Romero had lied in his preliminary testimony. Loomis said he could not speak on behalf of Romero as to what statements may have been false in the past or if Romero would have lied on the stand Tuesday.

“In other words, he changed his testimony,” Huff said.

Loomis said that despite Romero having been granted immunity from prosecution for his testimony in this case, Romero does not have immunity regarding perjury and Romero believes that if he testifies he will be open to a perjury charge.

Without Romero’s trial testimony, Vrana requested that Romero’s testimony from the preliminary hearing and his recorded interviews with police from the night of the shooting be read to the jury.

Martinez-Diaz’s defense attorney, Michael Clarke, objected to the use of Romero’s previous testimony since Romero himself had called that testimony into question. In addition, Clarke said the defense would not be able to cross-examine recordings or previous testimony.

Huff then ordered that Romero’s previous statements could not be allowed in the trial.

“It is in doubt. Even under grant of immunity he will not testify. It is suppressed,” Huff said.

The prosecution then immediately filed an interlocutory appeal of Huff’s suppression order. An interlocutory appeal is an appeal of an issue during a trial before the trial has reached a final judgment.

“The state has filed an interlocutory appeal; this court no longer has jurisdiction,” Huff said.

Huff then dismissed the jury and said that a new trial and jury would have to be ordered once the appeal process was complete.

Martinez-Diaz’s defense attorney, Clarke, told the Journal-World that he has never had a case that was interrupted in this way but that the single-issue appeal should be expedited by the state appeals court since it isn’t a full case.

As previously reported by the Journal-World, Martinez-Diaz’s co-defendant in this case, Ontareo X. Jackson, pleaded no contest to a second-degree attempted murder charge on Feb. 25, 2022. He was recently sentenced to 59 months in prison.

Martinez-Diaz on Tuesday was taken back to the Douglas County Jail, where he is being held for drug charges unrelated to the shooting. He was out on a $75,000 bond for the attempted-murder charge before the drug arrest in March. He is currently being held on a $250,000 bond.

The version of events that Romero eventually provided at the November hearing, as the Journal-World reported, was that he and his girlfriend, Nehrbass, were in their vehicle and were being followed through North Lawrence by Martinez-Diaz and Jackson, and that when they reached the intersection of North and North Seventh streets, Martinez-Diaz and Jackson were hanging out of their car with firearms.

“Next thing I know, I was getting shot at,” Romero said.

Nehrbass was struck in the head and neck in the incident. Romero said he drove her to the hospital and spoke to police about the incident immediately afterward.

Romero testified in November that he was not completely forthcoming with police when he was initially interviewed after the incident. He said he told the police only what he believed to be “necessary,” because he believed in “street code,” which includes not snitching on others. But he said he was testifying in court because he no longer believed in “street code.”

In the unrelated first-degree murder case in which Romero is a defendant, he is charged with killing 21-year-old Christian Willis in September 2021 during an alleged drug deal. He was also charged in that case with possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. Romero is being held on a $1 million cash or surety bond.