Court Watch

A few weeks a strange series of incident occurred involving what should have been a routine medical marijuana case.  In most counties, medical marijuana is a rather straightforward issue.  As long as the individuals have valid medical marijuana cards, the state and local law enforcement does not get involved.  However, our understanding is that Yolo County, despite state law and county orders, refuses to recognize state law, only federal law.

So, three individuals were arrested transporting medical marijuana to a dispensary.  They all have valid 215 medical marijuana cards.  Several people have told the Vanguard that in any other county there would have been no arrest.

The question of wrongful convictions is a vexing one.  The best data and research seems to be in the area of death penalty cases.  Death penalties cases are both a good and bad test area for exposing wrongful convictions overall in the system.  They are good because there has been a lot of scrutiny and focus on death penalty cases.  Appeals are automatic.  Data is prevalent.

On the other hand, the death penalty cases also expose the most biases in the system.  For instance, the difference between whites and blacks receiving death sentences is far greater than the white versus black discrepancy in the overall criminal justice system.

I do not wish to pile on at this point.  I understand local newspapers are hurting and I understand, as Woodland Daily Democrat Editor Jim Smith communicated a few months ago, that the lack of resources mean practicing journalism in ways that local papers would prefer not to do.

Back in June, Jim Smith acknowledged the problematic nature of simply re-printing press releases.  Mr. Smith writes, “Years and years ago, The Democrat — like many other newspapers — had a policy of not publishing a “press release” from any public agency until it had been “fact checked.” Preferably, the release was taken and rewritten with appropriate attribution provided, as well as reviewed for background information with a trip to the agency, or office, in question if necessary.”

Over two years ago, Marco Topete allegedly shot and killed Yolo County Sheriff’s Deputy Anthony Diaz.  The evidence in support of that is strong and compelling.  Yet from day one, the case has been fumbled all over the field.

On June 18, 2008, Mr. Topete was to be arraigned on charges that included the first-degree murder of a Yolo County Sheriff’s Deputy.  The media and public, including Mr. Topete’s family, were locked out of that hearing.  Deputy Diaz had himself been a bailiff in these courts, and evidence suggests that on the arraignment day other courtrooms recessed early, allowing their bailiff-deputies to go and fill up spaces at the arraignment.

On January 20, we launched the Yolo Judicial Watch project as a focused effort to monitor and track cases that go through the Yolo County Judicial system.  The idea was to report to the public on what happens in an area of our government that they often have limited access to.  We do not have TV in our local courtrooms.  We do not have regular news coverage either.

Often, all the public has to go on is the first-hand coverage of a few high-profile cases and the press releases from the DA’s office that are biased and often run verbatim in the local newspapers and local media.

The Vanguard has complained in the past of the sometimes misleading press releases coming  out of the Office of the District Attorney, Yolo County.  However, Monday’s press release on the Michael Artz case really takes the cake.  Nowhere does it mention that the jury acquitted  Mr. Artz of the main charge, forced oral copulation.  It instead focuses on elements, most of which were either never charged by the DA or were exonerated by the jury.  The local media did themselves and the public no favors by posting the press release verbatim.

On Monday, The Vanguard spoke for a second time with Defense Counsel for Mr. Artz in the criminal trial, Kathryn Druliner.  She stated that “[The DA’s press release] absolutely misstates what happened.  He was acquitted by twelve people of the only charge over which the jury had discretion.  That is the charge that he forced [the victim] to engage in any sex act.”

A Yolo County Jury Friday found Michael Artz, a graduate of Davis High School, not guilty of forced oral copulation for an incident that occurred more than two years ago involving another Davis High Student who was 16 at the time.  However, they did find him guilty of two felonies, oral copulation with a person under 18 and contact and communication with a minor with the intent to have sexual relations. 

Mr. Artz had just turned 18 at the time of the incident and was just a year ahead of the victim in school.  Yolo County Deputy DA Tiffany Susz was unable prove that the encounter was non-consensual, and instead was only able to prove that Mr. Artz received oral sex from a minor.  For that transgression, he may now have to register as a sex offender for life.

The ongoing California budget crisis has put huge strains on large sectors of the economy as businesses and people are in financial trouble.  In particular, it is putting a huge strain on those entities who rely on state money to provide various services to the population. 

The Vanguard has learned that several local Drug Treatment Facilities have stopped receiving payments since  March of 2010.  As a result, while they are not closing their doors, they are laying off staff members and releasing patients from their facilities.

In one of the more high profile cases in Yolo County from the summer of 2008, Marco Topete allegedly shot Yolo County Sheriff’s Deputy Anthony Diaz near the town of Dunnigan.  Deputy Diaz had attempted to pull over Mr. Topete on suspicion of drunk driving, and discovered a four-month-old girl inside.  Deputy Diaz died at the hospital later that night.

The case received even more notoriety however when the press and family members were locked out of the courtroom during arraignment.  This led to a series of accusations from the media, including this site, about the propriety of the process.  Attempts to have the venue moved outside of Yolo County have proven futile, despite the fact that the victim worked in the Courthouse for years and knew the staff, the Judges, the attorneys, and the bailiffs.

As the trial of Michael Artz, a Davis High graduate accused of forced oral copulation with a minor, winds toward a verdict possibly as soon as this morning, the spotlight has shifted away from the problems with the case and towards the conduct of Yolo County Judge Stephen Mock.

Throughout the lengthy testimony, Judge Mock has had to rule on a large number of objections. There are issues such as the admissibility of evidence, that we will discuss after a verdict is reached. However, his rulings on a number of hearsay objections, as during a lengthy cross-examination of Davis Police Detective Jeff Beasley by defense attorney Kathryn Druliner, raised some questions.

Last week a Yolo County Jury acquitted Anthony Eugene Hunter of assault with a deadly weapon in an axe attack against Daniel Hernandez that occurred in June of 2010.  The incident appears seeped in charges of racial bias on the part of the parties. The jury determined that the assault was in self-defense.

Officer Jerry Watson of the West Sacramento Police Department described arriving on the seen in the late afternoon of June 1.  Mr. Hernandez, the alleged victim, was covered in blood on his head and shirt.  He stated that he had arrived home from work with his boss, John Spurgin, and in the adjacent yard, an African-American male was yelling names and profanities at the boss.

Last year Davis Enterprise columnist Rich Rifkin wrote a piece that generated as much attention and criticism as any he has written.  In his column, Mr. Rifkin describes a rather horrific and senseless crime, where an individual pulled out a knife and stabbed another individual without warning several times.

From that he picks his bone against the ACLU, arguing that the these stories are “the product of successful lawsuits decades ago by the ACLU that “freed” the mentally ill from psychiatric hospitals.”

We have spent a lot of time on these pages looking at issues like burden of proof and burden shifting, the overcharging by prosecutors, the overly-stringent and harsh mandatory sentencing laws, but for the average person who ends up in the system, the most likely outcome is some sort probation and a fine.

I do not think we talk nearly enough about the system of fines that have been imposed.  This week already, I have noted just in sitting through regular calendar hearings that one individual received a $550 fine for possession of less than one ounce of marijuana.  Another individual had his fine reduced down to a little more than $100 by Judge Rosenberg.  But for the most part we see the regular assessment of fines in minor crimes, mostly drug possession cases where the individual is put into some mandatory treatment program (which has additional costs to the individual) and then they have to pay a fine.

On December 5, 2009, Miguel Ruiz and Tiffany Dougherty entered the West Sacramento Wal Mart among other things, Mr. Ruiz purchased with cash a stereo, a game, and a Wii game controller.  Moments later, Ms. Dougherty re-entered the store with Mr. Ruiz’s bag and receipt and attempted to walk out with an identical stereo and video game.  She was met by store security and the West Sacramento PD was called.  Ms. Dougherty was arrested and she eventually plead no contest to her role in the case.

However, Mr. Ruiz was charged for his involvement with four felonies, including burglary, petty theft, and two conspiracy charges.  On Wednesday a Yolo County jury found him guilty on all four courts and now Mr. Ruiz could face up to three years in prison for someone else stealing less than $200 worth of merchandise.

At a time when teachers and schools are being cut to the bone, the Governor’s idea of taking $65 million out of the state’s general fund to construct a new wing with 1152 beds for San Quentin’s death row is drawing fire from newspapers and columnists across the state.

In fact, it is worse, as the Sacramento Bee reported yesterday. The $64.7 million is merely a down payment.  “Construction would cost about $360 million. Interest payments on 20-year bonds the state ordinarily would sell to finance the construction could add another $150 million or more to the final price tag.”

On June 17, the Vanguard reported that, despite all of the attention that Arizona’s immigration laws were receiving, in our own neighborhood, in fact,  similar tactics are being used.

A lawsuit has moved forward that charges the unlawful collaboration between the Sonoma County Sheriff’s Department and the U.S. Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to unlawfully target, arrest, and detain Latinos in Sonoma County.

Yolo County Judge Stephen Mock sentenced Rudy Ornelas on Thursday morning to 45 years in prison following his July jury trial in which he was found guilty of unpremeditated attempted murder, use and possession of a firearm and assault with the firearm.

As the Vanguard reported on July 20, Mr. Ornelas had been accused of chasing and firing at Abel Trevino, a man he had known for many years, with a loaded 9mm handgun belonging to another acquaintance, Claudio Magobet. The prosecution’s position, with some of the testimony and most of the police reports in support, was that Mr. Ornelas and Mr. Trevino had a dispute over drugs and money.

The West Sacramento Gang Injunction trial took an interesting turn late Wednesday afternoon when Judge Kathleen White, as the proceedings were wrapping up, suddenly admonished the plaintiffs.  Thus far the plaintiffs’ case has been a series of West Sacramento police officers testifying to various incidents they have witnessed and questionably admissible hearsay statements that have been relayed to them by the defense.

The result has been a long, tedious, incongruous process that has left all involved fatigued and at times puzzled as to how the pieces will fit into place.  Judge White has already made it clear that while she will not tell the plaintiffs how to call their witnesses and layout their case, that she thinks it would benefit them to at least get some experts to layout an overarching theory.