In 2006, embroiled in an ugly and polarizing controversy, Police Chief Jim Hyde abruptly left for greener pastures but not before firing some parting shots at the City of Davis and the Human Relations Commission, chaired at the time by my wife, Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald.
Nearly three years later, Chief Hyde could apparently not get over his problems in Davis, as he fired shots at his former department in a small “indy” magazine in Contra Costa County.
One of the big problems facing the AB 109 budgeting process, at the county level, is that it takes a 4/5th’s vote of the Board of Supervisors to block the implementation of budget and recommendations put forth by the Community Corrections Partnership, made up of the various stakeholders in the process.
The problem, as one of the supervisors put it, is that the budget process turned into a funding security plan where the stakeholders were able to divvy up the budget in a way to protect their turf, rather than look at the best uses for money.
Over the weekend, Tyrone Smith, 32 was arrested after being suspected of shooting a Twin Rivers Unified School District Officer multiple times during an attempted traffic stop.
The officer, just 25 and a police officer for less than two years, had been in critical condition but appears to have survived and is recovering after surgery. A spokesperson for the Twin Rivers Police Department reported that the officer is in pain but “awake, talking and in good spirits.”
This event will feature, among others, Linda Starr, the Legal Director of the Northern California Innocence Project, which has played a strong role in a number of recent exonerations.
The real question, as we are now moving toward a month into realignment, is how California counties will decide to deal with realignment – do they change the way they handle a number of cases or do they simply try to add jail space?
Comments last week at UC Davis by CDCR Director Matthew Cate suggested that when we drill down numbers, we really need to re-think how we approach incarceration.
After a morning of good discussions and reasoned discourse at last week’s realignment dialogue, Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley became unhinged. Mr. Cooley had actually been an innovator, someone who pushed for change in the charging of third strikes to avoid sending the pizza thieves and cheese bandits to prison for the rest of their lives.
But something changed, in his ill-fated efforts to become the State Attorney General, where he was narrowly upset by Kamala Harris, after declaring victory the night of the election.
On November 3, Yolo Judicial Watch will focus its attention, at its annual Fundraiser and Awards Ceremony Event, on the issue of preventing wrongful convictions. This event will feature, among others, Linda Starr, the Legal Director of the Northern California Innocence Project, which has played a strong role in a number of recent exonerations.
Maurice Caldwell, who will also speak at the November 3 event, was wrongfully convicted of a 1990 murder and had his verdict overturned last December, after spending over 20 years in prison. He was finally released this year around the first of April.
As we discussed on Thursday in the first installment of this series on the UC Davis School of Law Program on “Crime and Punishment Revisited,” the application of AB 109, commonly known as realignment, figures to change the nature of the criminal justice system, but no one knows for sure just how.
Yesterday we talked about the reasons for AB 109 and the problems in the legal system, and today we will talk specifically about three strikes.
Public Officials Explain Realignment, Why We Need It, and Express Concerns About How It Will Be Implemented –
The application of AB 109, commonly known as realignment, figures to change the nature of the criminal justice system, but no one knows for sure just how. On Wednesday, UC Davis School of Law had a program featuring policymakers, prosecutors, academics and other experts who discussed and debated just what AB 109 will mean and what will happen going forward.
This was not simply an academic exercise, as the panelists and audience members would be asked to draft recommendations that would be forwarded to the legislature. This is the first of at least two, possibly three, installments covering the panels and discussion at UC Davis.
On November 3, Yolo Judicial Watch will focus its attention, at its annual Fundraiser and Awards Ceremony Event, squarely on the issue of Preventing Wrongful Convictions. This event will feature, among others, Linda Starr, the Legal Director of the Northern California Innocence Project, and Maurice Caldwell, a man who was wrongfully convicted of a 1990 murder and who had his verdict overturned last December after spending over 20 years in prison. He was finally released this year around the first of April.
According to published reports, the critical finding was that Mr. Caldwell had been represented by ineffective defense counsel. His attorney, according to the Innocence Project, has been since disbarred for conduct in other cases. Since his 1991 conviction, another man had admitted to the victim’s murder and several witnesses would testify that Mr. Caldwell was nowhere near the scene of the crime.
Death penalty critics, many of them recent converts to the cause precisely because of the length of stay and prohibitive cost, quickly jumped on a study released this summer from U.S. Ninth Circuit Judge Arthur L. Alarcon and Loyola Law School professor Paula M. Mitchell, which found that the death penalty adds $184 million to the budget over what it would cost to imprison people for life.
Seizing on that study, the Safe Coalition was formed, led by notables such as former San Quentin Warden Jeanne Woodford, and former Los Angeles County District Attorney Don Heller, who wrote the original 1978 legislation.
Everyone believes that AB 109, the prison realignment bill, will be a game changer, but as we have noted in previous articles and columns, no one knows just how it will play out.
Law enforcement has predictably come out against AB 109, but many seem to forget, this is not really a choice on the part of California, the federal courts are mandating prison reduction.
The Vanguard has received additional statements about the tasering that occurred in West Sacramento on September 8, 2009.
A few weeks ago the Vanguard reported on Thomas Dias who alleges that CHP Officer Raul Reyna tasered him after he assisted his niece, who had run out of gas and was on the on the shoulder of I-80 eastbound, east of Reed Avenue in West Sacramento.
“Norteño gangs” were the first words that Deputy DA Garrett Hamilton uttered in the opening statement for the prosecution – that was no accident, as Defense Attorney Hayes Gable noted in his closing arguments.
Among the most problematic elements of the current criminal justice system are liberties prosecutors and gang experts get in promoting gang charges. As Mr. Gable would note in his brilliant closing statement that thoroughly dismantled the gang charges, the gang expert’s testimony was based on smoke and mirrors – rumor and innuendo, unnamed sources and unprovable allegations backed by the expert’s “training and experience.”
To the surprise of no one, the Yolo County jury charged with deciding the guilt phase of the Marco Topete case came back in less than a day and convicted Mr. Topete on all charges, special circumstances and enhancements.
Those convictions include first degree murder for the 2008 shooting death of Sheriff’s Deputy Tony Diaz, with four special circumstances – murdering a peace officer, murder in order to avoid arrest, lying in wait and a gang special circumstance. He also faced an enhancement for the use of the gun to commit murder.
Analysis of Closing Arguments Part One: Prosecution and Defense’s Discrediting the Gang Charges
After over three years of waiting, and months of trial, the case of Marco Topete accused of the shooting death of Yolo County Sheriff’s Deputy, Tony Diaz, finally went to the jury. And while the odds may be clearly stacked against the defendant in this case, his defense made a surprisingly strong case for second degree murder.
Mr. Topete faces, among his seven charges, murder in the first degree with four special circumstances – murdering a peace officer, murder in order to avoid arrest, lying in wait and a gang special circumstance. He also faces an enhancement for the use of the gun to commit murder.
The Topete trial’s guilt phase will likely end today as both the prosecution and defense are expected to give their closing statements.
Last week brought an interesting twist, as Marco Topete unexpectedly pondered whether or not to testify on his own behalf. His defense attorneys were clearly caught off guard by the possibility of their client testifying.
There is just something not right about an election involving judicial candidates. Part of the problem is that judges by their nature should not exercise their opinions, they should be listeners and they should take steps to make sure that the law is being followed and that all sides are given a fair chance to present their perspective.
I bring this up, because what is emerging in Yolo County is a full-on pitched battle between the bench and the prosecutor’s office.
The Field Poll conducted earlier this month and released yesterday shows consistent and substantial public support in California for keeping the death penalty as a form of punishment for capital crimes.
68 percent of those polled support the death penalty, which just 27 percent favor doing away with.
The case of Troy Davis and his execution amid serious doubts about his actual guilt focused the nation on the death penalty last week, but the truth is the focus has been on the death penalty for a lot longer than that.
A month ago, opponents of the death penalty launched an effort in California to commute all death sentences to life without parole, to put more resources into law enforcement efforts, and to work to help the families of murder victims.