LOS ANGELES, CA – A superior court judge agreed with private attorney Thomas W. Kielty’s motion to dismiss the kidnapping to commit robbery charge against his client, here last Friday during a pretrial hearing in Los Angeles County Superior Court.
Deputy District Attorney Juliet E. Schmidt, newly assigned to the case, argued the victim was forced to move a substantial distance, causing harm.
However, she appeared to be surprised when the defense countered by pointing out the absence of dividers in the donut shop and the insubstantial movement of the claimed victim.
Judge Kathryn Solorzano granted the motion to dismiss after DDA Schmidt admitted she did not read the transcript of previous hearings and based her arguments and knowledge on the faulty notes of the previously assigned DDA.
Based on police reports, the robbery occurred at 5 a.m. Three suspects, wearing ski masks, entered a donut shop and proceeded to hold the owner at gunpoint. The gunman, pointing his gun at the back of the owner’s head, demanded the owner turn over the store’s safe.
After pleading to the gunman that he did not own a safe, the three suspects proceeded to ransack the store, taking any available valuables, including the cash register and the victim’s purse. The three men then took off in a car, getting away with several hundred dollars in cash.
Judge Solorzano stepped into court asking DDA Schmidt and PA Kielty to confirm if the accused, on trial, was the gunman in the band of three. PA Kielty argued his client was the driver, referencing the height difference between the gunman and the accused.
PA Kielty also cited the shorter individual holding the pistol was wearing a red sweatshirt that his client does not own. Victim testimony following the robbery confirmed that the gunman was indeed wearing a red shirt during the robbery.
DDA Schmidt initially admitted that she wasn’t fully aware of the prosecution’s stance concerning the accused’s potential gun possession claim. Due to the conflicting responses, Judge Solorzano went back to check the previous pretrial transcript and revealed it was never confirmed the accused was the gunman.
Judge Solorzano repeatedly interrogated DDA Schmidt concerning case details as DDA Schmidt scrambled to read over the pretrial transcript. She eventually admitted defense claims were valid and that she did not look over the transcript when assigned the case and solely based her arguments on the incorrect notes of the previous DDA.
PA Kielty further filed a motion to dismiss the accused’s aggravated robbery charge, citing the compact size of the shop and the lack of physical barriers dividing the cash register and the kitchen. It was also later confirmed by Judge Solorzano, based on pre-trial transcripts, the victim moved a total of 10 feet when the gunman forced him to the back.
In response, DDA Schmidt argued that based on testimony, the victim was still forced to the back of the shop, limiting the victim’s ability to escape and further endangering the life of the shop owner.
Judge Solorzano appeared to become increasingly irritated as she explained to DDA Schmidt that 10 feet of distance was not significant enough to substantiate the accused’s aggravated assault charge.
Judge Solorzano inevitably advised DDA Schmidt to take time and educate herself on the nuances of the case, and that the court would grant the defense motion as a movement of 10 feet does not put the victim in any more substantial danger.
