LOS ANGELES, CA – Deputy Public Defender Sonjia Denise White successfully argued at a Los Angeles County Superior Court preliminary hearing here Friday at the Airport Courthouse the prosecution was attempting to overcharge an arson charge to hold the accused on extremely high bail.
At the end of the hearing the court set $400,000 bail for the accused, who was being held for a Oct. 27 disturbance in Santa Monica.
The first witness said he was the clerk working the store register that night when the accused became extremely upset. The witness claimed the clerk and his coworker had informed him that he could not pay with an EBT card and would have to pay with EBT cash.
Both DPD White and the visiting judge claimed they did not understand the witness, but White confirmed the accused allegedly threw a cup of soda at the coworker’s face, then proceeded to throw a cookie tray, and tried to enter the register area.
The witness said they used pepper spray, which ultimately infuriated the accused so much that he left the store, returned with a piece of paper on fire, and threw it inside the store.
The second witness called to the stand was a deputy sheriff who said he was told there was a disturbance at the business and possible vandalism. He claimed that when he arrived at the scene, he saw the accused being detained.
DPD White stated she believes the case charge is exaggerated and that the first witness exaggerated as well. She requested a motion to dismiss the case due to insufficiency of evidence.
She also added that pepper spray was used when the accused wasn’t doing anything and that the first witness left out many details from the true story. She added the first witness did not mention pulling a bat on the accused and that the pepper spray was used prematurely.
In regard to the bag the accused lit on fire, White stated, “I don’t think this is what the legislature intended when they wrote about attempted arson, one of the most serious crimes. It’s the same thing as throwing out a lit cigarette or a cigar.” She added it should be charged only as vandalism, not an arson.
The visiting judge stated there was no way of knowing what the accused intentions were with the bag that was lit on fire, adding, “In this case, it was put out; however, the accused doesn’t know how it was going to manifest.”
White referred to Penal Code section 455 for attempted arson, which states: “Any person who willfully and maliciously attempts to set fire to or attempts to burn or to aid, counsel, or procure the burning of any structure, forest land, or property, or who commits any act preliminary thereto, or in furtherance thereof, is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, two or three years,” according to the FindLaw website.
White argued, “It appears to be a more serious crime—arson versus attempted arson,” and sees this as an attempt to overcharge the accused with an arson charge.
Deputy District Attorney James Travis Burroughs stated, “Arson differs because of the dangerous unpredictability of fire.” He explained how the paper the accused threw into the store could have ignited a bag of chips.
The judge responded by clarifying the question to the prosecution: “Attempted arson requires a specific intent. What is the prosecution’s theory on the accused intent on what he was trying to burn?” The prosecution said the accused had attempted to burn the entire store.
The judge said that if the accused threw fire on the floor, “he intended to burn the floor,” and questioned whether to modify the charge to attempted arson and whether that would be a more accurate way to describe the conduct that occurred.
Because of the Penal Code nuances, the accused was charged under Count 1 (664), attempting to commit a crime, and bail was set at $400,000. The judge informed the accused to return on Dec. 20.
