Yolo County

By Kaiti Curry Kevin Ellis, a man recently convicted of molesting two preadolescent boys, may be facing…

by Antoinnette Borbon

A Madison man was found not guilty on all counts, along with enhancements, in what would be one of the shortest deliberations I have seen yet. He was a Vallejo man who had moved to Madison at the beginning of this year. The defendant stated he had just returned from a trip with his fiancé on the night of July 8.

Cornell, the defendant, stated he had been staying with the elderly couple, parents of his housemate, who he referred to as Mom and Pops. Cornell said his PG&E had been turned off and the couple was kind enough to allow him to stay at their nearby house for a few days; they were also the parents of Steven Bertram, the alleged victim.

Last week tragedy struck the small town of Winters when William Gardner allegedly gunned down his ex-grilfriend in downtown Winters, in broad daylight, just days after being released from custody at the Yolo County jail, where he had been held on charges that he stalked and threatened the victim in this case, Leslie Pinkston.

Her friend, Katie Winkler, wrote this week that Ms. Pinkston was “terrorized by an abusive ex-boyfriend. Harassed, stalked and threatened via social media, through email, phone and in person, Leslie tried to prevent and stop this behavior on her own and with the help of family and friends. She changed her number, she moved, she stayed under the radar, all in an effort to keep herself and her daughter safe.”

by Antoinnette Borbon

After nearly three days of deliberation in the multi-defendant case, jurors told Judge David Rosenberg they could not reach a decision. The jury foreman was asked by Rosenberg whether, if they had more time to deliberate, they could reach a decision, but only one of twelve said yes.

But what we would learn from what they struggled with signaled a pause. Defense Attorney Jeff Raven explained to the family of one of the defendants, Jose Jimenez, that the jurors felt intimidated by the groups of family present during trial.

By Kaiti Curry

Kevin Ellis, who was found guilty of molesting two young boys and failing to register as a sex offender in October, may be in luck.  The 55-year-old man could have been sentenced to multiple life imprisonment sentences by Judge Mock on November 22, but instead the case has been continued while a mistrial issue is being investigated.

One of the jurors allegedly spoke to his or her neighbor about the case while actively involved in Ellis’s trial.  This is unfortunate, and is grounds for a mistrial.

by Antoinnette Borbon

As the morning began, all four defense attorneys asked Judge Rosenberg to consider an [Penal Code section] 1118 motion to dismiss charges against the four young men accused of second degree robbery and assault on a Woodland man.

The prosecutor had added a gang enhancement to two of the counts against all four young men. But, despite an exhaustive effort by Attorney Jeff Raven, the motion was denied. Judge Rosenberg felt there was sufficient evidence to allow a jury to decide on the charges, and ruled against the 1118 motion.

by Antoinnette Borbon

The multi-defendant trial involving four young men in what is being said, by the Yolo County Gang Task Force, to be a gang-related crime has taken on more challenging testimony by alleged victim Scott Nichols and his girlfriend Donna Beatty this past week.

On Friday we heard testimony from the girlfriend of Nichols, who has appeared to have little recollection of what she told police on the night of June 19th. She claimed she was “a mad woman!” and under the influence of drugs and alcohol. She stated she never told police she could identify the attackers positively. But, in testimony given by both Officers Lara and Lutrell, it was said she identified one young male by his Mongolian-style hairdo, tattoos and large necklace.

On June 30, outside a Woodland 7-Eleven store, there was a confrontation between 28-year-old Kristal Sutton and 58-year-old Alisa Horner, where Ms. Sutton ultimately ran over Ms. Horner and fled the scene.  A few days later, Ms. Horner would die and Ms. Sutton would be taken into custody.

Outraged at what they perceived to be relatively light charges of a felony hit and run resulting in death, rather than a vehicular homicide or murder, the family of Ms. Horner would come to the Vanguard Court Watch Council Meeting in Woodland in late July, that was attended by both Sheriff Ed Prieto and Woodland Police Chief Dan Bellini.

by Catherine McKnight

The further jury trial resumed on Thursday morning in the multi-defendant case involving an alleged attack and robbery at the 7-Eleven in Woodland. Deputy District Attorney Robin Johnson presented her first witness in the case, the alleged victim, Christopher Scott Nichols.

She began her direct examination by asking Mr. Nichols a string of questions on his three previous felony convictions, which include possession of methamphetamine, selling methamphetamine, and spousal abuse. He is also in custody right now due to a failure to appear for the spousal abuse case.

By Dan Aiello

California’s drug laws will remain steeped with inconsistent consequences for those convicted of simple possession after Governor Jerry Brown’s recent veto of a bill to make unlawful possession of certain controlled substances, including opiates, punishable as either a felony or as a misdemeanor.

Current law mandates a felony charge for possession of any opiate-based narcotic, while allowing for other drugs like L.S.D. and Methamphetamine to be “wobblers,” allowing local District Attorneys to prosecute as either felony or misdemeanor.

By Antoinnette Borbon and Catherine McKnight

Gang Task Force And Police May Have Chosen The Wrong Kids This Time – What was proposed to be a short jury selection yesterday for the trial of four young men accused of second degree robbery and assault with great bodily injury, along with a gang enhancement, turned into nearly a two-day process. It appeared to be obvious some of the defense’s questions were hard to answer, even emotional, for some potential jurors.

During jury selection all four defense counsel kept their foundation based around the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Robert Spangler, defense counsel for one of the young men, asked the jurors if they had a problem rendering a verdict because of religious or moral beliefs. Defense attorney Jeff Raven geared his questions and statements more toward the presumption of believing someone’s innocence before assuming their guilt.

by Antoinette Borbon and Sanam  Monjazeb

Editor’s note: For background, here’s the coverage of the preliminary hearing

The Kristal Sutton trial commenced today, November 13, 2013, with three witnesses testifying. 28-year-old Sutton is being prosecuted for a felony hit and run on June 13, 2013, as she allegedly ran over 58-year-old Valerie Horner with her car and fled the scene before the authorities showed up. Horner received life-threatening injuries from the car and died from these injuries two days later.

The trial began with an audio interview between Sutton and Officer Lutrell.

Stop me if you have heard this one before – a high profile case in which the defendant is facing dozens of felony charges and a potential life sentence, but, following a plea agreement, likely will not serve any time in prison.

The case of 37-year-old Troy Hensley, a former JV football coach at Dixon High, is one of those.  Mr. Hensley was arrested in June and held to answer in August on charges that he carried out a lengthy sexual relationship with a then 17-year-old student for four months while she was underage.

Yolo Chapter, California Grand Jurors’ Association

Sometimes the Yolo County Grand Jury addresses sensational topics, such as the recent expose of malfeasance in the probation department, or the delivery of an indictment in the Deputy Tony Diaz murder case. In most instances, its work and possibly it highest value lies in keeping tabs on more mundane activities. A major and very important function of the Yolo County Grand Jury is to see that county agencies and organizations, including special districts, are providing residents with good service. Every year the Grand Jury issues a report describing its investigations along with recommendations. Agencies are required to respond to these recommendations within 90 days (California Penal Code, Title 4, Sect. 933). However, by the time the responses come in, a new Grand Jury is in place.

As former grand jurors and members of the Yolo Chapter of the California Grand Jurors’ Association, we have followed up on previous Grand Jury recommendations. We selected responding agencies that stated they were either planning to implement a recommendation or needed time for further study. We wrote to agency heads listing earlier Grand Jury recommendations (along with their agency’s responses) and asked about the current status of the situation.

California leads the nation in wrongful convictions, according to a 2012 study, but it trails many states, particularly New Jersey, in safeguards and best practices aimed at reducing critical areas where wrongful convictions are likely to occur.  Assemblymember Tom Ammiano has been attempting to change that with his support of the Innocence Project Bill.

The law would authorize “law enforcement agencies to adopt regulations for conducting in person and photo line-ups; allows expert testimony at trial regarding the reliability of eyewitness identification; and requires the court to provide a jury instruction advising that it may consider whether or not law enforcement followed specified procedures when determining the reliability of eyewitness identification.”

Each year, San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi and his office host the Justice Summit in San Francisco, bringing together a combination of local leaders and national figures whose work in the legal community and for social justice gets highlighted through speeches and panel presentations.

This year marked the 50-year Anniversary of Gideon v. Wainwright, which guarantees the poor and disenfranchised the right to a vigorous public defense.  On March 18, 1963, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Gideon v. Wainwright that all defendants have the constitutional right to a free attorney if they cannot afford their own. Fifty years later, 80 percent of criminal defendants are served by public defenders.

This past week, students in the UC Davis School of Law Immigration Law Clinic, working under the supervision of Lecturer and Staff Attorney Raha Jorjani, were successful in preventing the deportation of a detained client.

Working on behalf of their client, they succeeded in filing a Motion to Terminate removal proceedings that cited recent U.S. Supreme Court opinions in arguing that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had not met its burden of proof in establishing that the client’s criminal convictions were deportable under the Immigration and National Security Act.

We often hear that a conviction was thrown out based on a technicality.  In this case, the technicality is not just Miranda, but the actual right to an attorney.  This is not a technicality, this is a constitutional right.

Last week, the LA Times covered a federal appeals court’s unanimous overturning of a first degree murder conviction in which the man was sentenced to life without parole for killing his estranged wife and an off-duty Los Angeles sheriff’s deputy.