ALAMOSA - Robert Tre Howell appeared in court last week for sentencing in the March 2020 death of his 16-month-old son, Crashtyn.

In a plea deal reached between the counsel for the defense, Mr. Valenti, and the District Attorney’s office, Howell pled guilty to Accessory to a Crime, a class four felony. All other charges were dismissed, including Murder in the First Degree of a child under 12 years old, a class two felony, Child Abuse Knowingly and Recklessly Causing Death, a class two felony, and Child Abuse, Negligently Causing Death, a class three felony.

The plea deal, which was accepted by presiding Judge Martin Gonzales, originally called for deferred adjudication – meaning the crime will be removed from Howell’s record if he successfully completes five years of probation with other stipulations attached.

However, at the end of the sentencing hearing, Judge Gonzales increased the period of probation to six years and expanded some of the stipulations. Howell is prohibited from alcohol, drugs or firearms (including for hunting) and going into a bar. He will also submit to random drug testing three times a month, at his cost. He is required to have a mandatory mental health examination with treatment, if so ordered by the evaluation.

He is also required to serve 500 hours of community service that prohibits his contact with children under the age of 18. He is also prohibited from coaching or assisting in weight training with anyone under the age of 18 and is ordered to pall a fine of $500 plus all court costs.

The hearing, which lasted close to an hour and half, involved multiple people testifying both in Howell’s behalf and on behalf of the victim.

As was true when Apryl Behrens, co-defendant in the case and the victim’s mother, was sentenced, those who spoke on behalf of Crashtyn did so with no small amount of emotion, speaking of both the child’s sweet demeanor and vulnerability in a living situation that was, quite obviously, less than safe.

Many took blame for not having intervened more persistently in the child’s life when they suspected that Behrens and Howell were not adequately caring for their son. Unequivocally, all speaking on behalf of Crashtyn condemned Howell for his actions, both while Crashtyn was alive and in the manner of his death.

Those who spoke on Howell’s behalf painted an entirely different picture, describing him as someone who was “excellent” and “encouraging” in his previous occupation that involved working with children. Others spoke of his devotion to his children from a previous relationship. Friends who had known him for most of his life described him as thoughtful, kind and consistently helpful in supporting others.

One individual spoke of the change they saw in Howell’s behavior once he became involved with Behrens, which was allegedly when he began his drug use via narcotics and heroine reportedly sold to him by Behrens’ mother. There was a total of 25 witnesses who testified, both in person and in writing, to Howell’s character, many expressing confidence that, if he was no longer abusing substances, he would lead a productive life.

District Attorney Alonzo Payne was not present in court as he was attending a statewide prosecutor’s meeting. In his place, Johanna Hendley, a former prosecutor with the 12^th judicial district who was just rehired last week, addressed the court on behalf of the state.

Hendley was far more critical of Howell’s behavior, stating upfront that she was not involved in the case when the resolution was reached and had only had four days to prepare for the hearing.

“I was up most of last night, thinking about what I would say,” she said in her opening statement. “This is probably one of the hardest cases I’ve ever had to deal with,” suggesting she was familiar with the case from her former tenure in the DA’s office.

Hendley went on to address some of the statements that had been made about Howell on his behalf, questioning his devotion to his other children as he owes more than $13,000 in back child support in one case. She also questioned how deeply distressed he could have been with Crashtyn’s death, given that he went golfing the day after the boy’s funeral.

But most damning was what she saw in Howell’s personality, which she felt was only confirmed in some of the testimonies that had been made as well as in a psychiatric report suggesting an anti-social personality that was capable of being manipulative of others.

The statement was not characteristic of many other statements that have been made by the DA’s office in sentencing hearings since January, including the sentencing hearing of Apryl Behrens where the DA spoke of the tragedy experienced by the couple in “the loss of their child.”

When Mr. Howell spoke on his own behalf, he accepted responsibility for becoming addicted to drugs, explaining its origin in painkillers he had been prescribed for an injury. He admitted the hardship his addiction caused in the lives of others and apologized. He spoke of Crashtyn, describing him as his “best bud” and the grief he feels every day in his loss.

Howell said he has become very involved in a church and is living with his mother where he helps her out on their ranch, going on to list other things he had done to assist people in his community and elsewhere, all done of his own volition and without compensation. He also testified that he had been “completely honest” with the police and did not know what happened to his son as he was sleeping for an extended period due to withdrawl from his use of heroine.

What Howell did not admit to was any involvement in Crashtyn’s death, other this his negligence in not caring for his son after being dealt a blow that fractured his skull which resulted in multiple seizures and, with such a long period of no attendance from either of his parents, his death.

Mr. Valenti, for the defense, echoed Hendley's sentiments, saying it was “a very hard case because no one will ever know what happened.”

Judge Gonzales also echoed how difficult the case was since the truth would never be fully known but suggested that the plea deal was probably the result of a “weak” case against Howell. While he did not agree with the deferred sentence, Gonzales said if he refused that part of the resolution, it might ultimately lead to court proceedings that would impact Howell’s life for a shorter period than what he sentenced Howell to in court.

“You will have another judge besides me to answer to for your actions,” Gonzales said to Howell. He further advised him that if he violated any one of the very strict conditions for the period of time he was on probation, Howell would end up back in court with an end that would “not be pleasant.”