WOODLAND, CA – An accused waived his Fifth Amendment rights to testify in his trial here last week in Yolo County Superior Court, but his testimony was then used against both his character and his defense by Deputy District Attorney Jose Figueroa, although the testimony also refuted Figueroa’s claims.
The accused, who was a prior convicted felon in the years of 1989 and 2001, stood trial for possession of a firearm as a prior convicted felon, possession of ammunition while not being allowed to own firearms, and an enhancement for prior felony conviction.
The accused allegedly possessed a rifle and a shotgun, with a gun safe inside the shed of the property.
DDA Jose Figueroa’s argument rested on Detective Hernan Vega’s testimony about the search of the accused’s abode, confirming the findings of the investigation, which included the ammunition, the gun safe, the rifle, and the shotgun within the accused’s property.
Deputy District Attorney David Nelson asked if forensic science was utilized to test the fingerprints on the weapons and gun safe, and the detective responded saying they didn’t test for it.
It was also revealed the detective(s) working on this case never tested either of the guns to see if they function, and the serial numbers on both of the guns were never run for serial numbers, though they allegedly had them.
The accused after this decided to waive his Fifth Amendment rights, and testify he was not the owner of the rifle—one of his tenants to whom he rents out his property is the owner. The accused stated he had two tenants living in his property, and he was often out of town due to his job.
The accused purchased a gun safe for his tenants to use, and that the code to the safe was changed to one he did not know, according to his testimony. He also testified the shotgun was non-functional, noting he was under the belief that he could own the shotgun if it did not work.
DDA Figueroa asked the accused, “You just let people you don’t know stay on your property?”
And, he added, in regard to the accused not knowing the code of the safe, “You expect the court to believe that testimony?”
Lastly, utilizing the accused’s claim he used the non-working shotgun as a way of intimidation with the intent of self-defense, he added, “You like to intimidate people?”
To all of these statements, DPD David Nelson objected.
Judge Catherine Hohenwarter found the accused guilty on both charges of possession of ammunition and firearms, and found, as “true,” the enhancement from the prior felony conviction.
