Carmen Navarrete de Gonzales sought to end contact with her former partner days before she and her teenage son were killed.
SANTA FE, N.M. — Five days before Carmen Navarrete de Gonzales and her teenage son were killed at their Santa Fe home, she had obtained a temporary court order directing her former partner, Jose Antonio “Adrian” Roman, to stay away, according to records later examined during the criminal case.
That narrow period between the protective order and the Nov. 13, 2023, killings became a crucial part of the prosecution’s timeline. Navarrete de Gonzales had described violence and threats while asking the court for protection after ending her relationship with Roman. He was eventually convicted in April 2026 of first-degree willful and deliberate murder in the deaths of Navarrete de Gonzales and her 15-year-old son, Axel Gonzales. In August, District Court Judge Jason Lidyard sentenced Roman, now 47, to two consecutive life terms plus 10½ years for two related felony convictions.
The court filing preceded the homicide investigation. Navarrete de Gonzales sought protection after an altercation involving Roman and alleged that he had assaulted and threatened her. Her petition made clear that she considered the relationship over and did not want Roman contacting her. A temporary no-contact order followed. A later hearing was expected to determine whether longer-term protection would be granted, but Navarrete de Gonzales and Axel were killed before that proceeding occurred.
The temporary order did not end Roman’s attempts to communicate with her. Evidence later discussed in the prosecution showed that he sent more than 100 text messages after the breakup without receiving a response. Prosecutors treated the messages as part of a sequence rather than as an isolated fact. They placed the unsuccessful contact attempts alongside the protective order, the deteriorating relationship, Roman’s acquisition of a shotgun and his drive from Albuquerque to Santa Fe in arguing that he acted deliberately.
The danger became more immediate on the evening of Nov. 13. Roman’s son contacted authorities and reported that his father had been drinking, had taken a shotgun and could be headed toward Navarrete de Gonzales. Law enforcement in Santa Fe was sent toward her residence for a welfare check. An emergency call from the home came as officers were responding. By the time a deputy reached the area, the shootings had occurred and Roman was leaving. He later fled from the immediate area and was arrested two days after the killings.
Inside the home, authorities found Navarrete de Gonzales and Axel dead from gunshot wounds. Other relatives were present and survived. Trial evidence showed Navarrete de Gonzales was killed in her bedroom and that Axel also was shot inside the residence. Prosecutors said Roman had fired toward the home and entered it before the killings. The defense disputed parts of that reconstruction, arguing that Roman fired through windows and challenging whether the state could prove every detail of his movements inside the house.
The central defense theory focused less on who fired the shots than on Roman’s state of mind. His attorney said Roman had consumed alcohol and cocaine and argued that his intoxication undercut the state’s claim that he formed the deliberate intent required for first-degree murder. Prosecutors countered with evidence of the actions Roman took before reaching the house. They argued that obtaining the gun, traveling approximately 60 miles and arriving at a particular address after repeated attempts to reach Navarrete de Gonzales showed purposeful conduct.
Jurors ultimately agreed with the prosecution. On April 22, they found Roman guilty of two counts of first-degree willful and deliberate murder, aggravated burglary with a deadly weapon and shooting at a dwelling or occupied building. The verdict transformed the protective-order timeline from evidence offered to establish intent into part of the factual background of two murder convictions. The jury’s decision also set the stage for a sentencing fight over whether punishment for the two killings should overlap.
Roman’s lawyers asked Lidyard to impose concurrent life sentences and again emphasized his alcohol and cocaine use. The judge declined. Lidyard pointed to Roman’s ability to travel from Albuquerque to Santa Fe, find the residence and engage in a sequence of directed actions while armed. He said the evidence of deliberate murder was particularly strong and ordered the two life terms to be served consecutively. Roman also received another 10½ years for the burglary and shooting offenses.
The sentencing brought the case back to events documented before the killings. Navarrete de Gonzales’ decision to seek legal protection had established in a court record that contact was unwanted. Prosecutors later relied on that fact to help explain the state of the relationship and Roman’s awareness that she wanted distance from him. The protective order did not itself prove the murder charges, but it became part of the chronology jurors considered alongside the communications, weapon, travel and evidence from the residence.
The criminal case took an unusually long route to that verdict. Pretrial proceedings in 2024 included disputes over forensic material and information involving expert witnesses. State prosecutors later dismissed the murder case while saying they expected to bring the charges again after additional preparation. Roman remained in custody and separately pleaded guilty in federal court to a firearm offense. The state case was later revived and reached a jury in April 2026.
That delay meant relatives and survivors lived with an unresolved murder case for more than two years. Navarrete de Gonzales’ mother traveled from Mexico following the deaths and later addressed Roman during sentencing through a translator. Her remarks focused on the loss of her daughter and grandson rather than the procedural history that had occupied much of the court record. By then, the central criminal questions had finally been answered through the jury’s verdicts.
Axel’s classmates had marked his death much earlier. The 15-year-old was a sophomore at Capital High School, and students gathered after the killings for a balloon release in his memory. Friends described him as someone who cared about his family and supported people around him. Their memorial occurred while investigators were still assembling the case and before the disputes over evidence, federal prosecution, state dismissal, refiling and eventual trial.
The case illustrates how the events documented before a homicide can later assume legal importance for reasons different from their original purpose. Navarrete de Gonzales sought a protective order in an effort to stop contact with Roman. Prosecutors later introduced the circumstances surrounding that separation as evidence bearing on motive and intent. The jury did not have to decide whether the order itself could have prevented the killings; it had to determine whether the state proved Roman deliberately committed them.
Nearly three years after Navarrete de Gonzales sought court protection, Roman’s state case has reached conviction and sentencing. The temporary order, unanswered messages, warning to police and travel to Santa Fe are now parts of a record that culminated in two first-degree murder verdicts and consecutive life sentences. Roman remains subject to that punishment while any further legal challenges would proceed separately through the courts.
Author note: Last updated October 17, 2026.