Yolo County

Commentary: Dev Appellate Brief Puts Forth Strong Evidence of Unfair Trial

Dev-2yr-1aI was not always sold on the innocence of Ajay Dev.  It was the summer of 2009 when I received an email from Mr. Dev’s sister-in-law about the case.  Mr. Dev had just been convicted, and he had not yet been sentenced to the stunning 378-year sentence.

Little did I realize that this would be a pivotal moment in my life, as I headed out to the Roseville home of the Devs and heard their story.  I didn’t know what to think, I had not seen the case, had not heard the evidence, and I was in a position of having to take their word for it.

Parish Responds to Bar Allegations, Pinning Mailer Decisions on Consultants’ Advice

Parish-1.png

In February, the State Bar of California filed disciplinary charges against a Yolo County attorney for allegedly failing to comply with ethical rules while seeking judicial office. Clinton Parish, 41, is accused  by the California Bar of making misrepresentations about himself and his opponent in the May 2012 election for Yolo County Superior Court.

According to the complaint, in May of 2012, Mr. Parish was seeking judicial office against incumbent Judge Dan Maguire when, through campaign advertising, he made a number of misrepresentations regarding his opponent.

Vanguard Analysis: Ajay Dev’s Appeal, Legal Arguments – Part II

Dev-2yr-7Three years after the conviction of Ajay Dev for the multiple counts of rape of his adoptive daughter and his sentence of 378 years to state prison, he and his attorney have filed their appeal.

Their appeal attacks both the facts of the case as well as the legal rulings used by Yolo County Judge Timothy Fall that the defense claims denied Ajay Dev of his right to a fair trial.  This includes, most notably, the inclusion of the alleged victim’s interpretation of a 50-minute pretext call that meandered between English and Nepali, the judge’s failure to properly instruct the jury on the law, and the judge’s refusal to allow potentially exculpatory evidence.

Eye on the Courts: The Startling Acknowledgement that Stop-and-Frisk is All About Racial Quotas

stop-and-frisk

For years, critics of the controversial New York stop-and-frisk program have argued that it was about racial profiling, with officers using the tactic on racial minorities in a fishing expedition, hoping to turn up evidence of crimes with no basis for stopping the individual other than the color of their skin.

Advocates filed a federal class action lawsuit against the New York Police Department and the city of New York, contending that the NYPD practice constitutes racial profiling and arguing that stop-and-frisks violate the constitutional rights of individuals against unlawful search and seizure.

Vanguard Analysis of Ajay Dev’s Appeal, Part I

Dev-2012-1

Three years after the conviction of Ajay Dev for the multiple counts of rape of his adoptive daughter and his sentence of 378 years to state prison, he and his attorney have filed their appeal.

Their appeal attacks both the facts of the case as well as the legal rulings used by Yolo County Judge Timothy Fall that the defense claims denied Ajay Dev of his right to a fair trial.  This includes most notably the inclusion of the alleged victim’s interpretation of a 50-minute pretext call that meandered between English and Nepalese, the judge’s failure to properly instruct the jury on the law, and the judge’s refusal to allow potentially exculpatory evidence.

My View: Hate Crime Attack Shines Light on Broken Bail System

vigil-partidaWhen the public discovered that Clayton Garzon, who allegedly badly beat Mikey Partida just six months after being charged with assault with a deadly weapon for actions in the early morning hours of September 11, 2012 in Dixon, had been free after posting bail, the public was outraged.

A $75,000 bail to Mr. Garzon’s family was nothing.  He was free in a matter of hours, his family reportedly posting the bail in cash.  The public, already angered at the brutal beating that seemed to be motivated by animus for the victim’s sexual orientation, was outraged.

DA Seeks Higher Bail in Davis Hate Crime

vigil-partidaWhen Davis Police arrested 19-year-old Davis resident Clayton Garzon last Thursday, he was arrested and booked in the Yolo County Jail, charged with assault causing great bodily injury; committing a hate crime; assault with a deadly weapon; stalking; committing a felony while on release from custody; and inflicting great bodily injury during the commission of a felony.

Despite the charges, and the looming assault with a deadly weapons charges stemming from the September 11 stabbings in Dixon, in Solano County, Mr. Garzon received a $75,000 bail and his family reportedly immediately posted bail, in cash.

VANGUARD COURT WATCH: Davis Man Convicted of Stealing Top Shelf Whiskey

Yolo-Count-Court-Room-600by Vanguard Court Watch Interns

Glynn Trial 1st Day Testimony

The trial of Michael Glynn began on Thursday, March 14. He was arrested on December 9, 2012 for stealing an $83 bottle of whiskey from a Davis grocery store. He was seen on two dates in November on the store’s surveillance video, taking the same whiskey with no evidence of purchase.

Deputy District Attorney Sulaiman Tokhi opened the People’s case, stressing that Glynn has three prior prison terms. Deputy Public Defender Richard Van Zandt reminded the jury that prior convictions cannot be used to find guilt in this case.

Officer in Tasering Case Involved in Possible Excessive Force Following Incident at the Grad

police_tapeLast week, Yolo County Superior Court Judge Samuel McAdam granted a Pitchess motion for former Davis Police Officer Lee Benson, in a case stemming from a barfight and resisting arrest charges against Jason McComic.

A Pitchess motion is a request for information contained in a police officer’s personnel file.  The motion is typically raised when defense attorneys have reason to believe that their client was the victim of police misconduct.

VANGUARD COURT WATCH: Sexual Abuse Case Fills a Court Room

Yolo-Count-Court-Room-600by Alexandra Rose

On the morning of Monday March 18, 2013, in Department 2 of the Yolo County Superior Court, the sexual abuse case of Julian Marquez was set to start under the Honorable Timothy L. Fall.

Julian Marquez was charged with 10 counts of lewd and lascivious acts with a minor and 1 count of attempting to commit lewd and lascivious acts with a minor.

VANGUARD COURT WATCH: Mings Murder Trial Looks to Resume in Late April

murderby Antoinnette Borbon

The day began with a lot of confusion over a mistake made by the court clerk in not notifying both parties about what courtroom defendant James Mings’ arraignment was to take place.

Defense attorney Dan Hutchinson mentioned this case has been before Judge Richardson in Department 1 but somehow ended up in Department 6 today. Neither Dan Hutchinson nor Deputy District Attorney Martha Holzapfel understood why they had not been notified about the change.

Eye on the Courts: Conviction Integrity – An Idea Whose Time Has Come

witness-idAs we celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court Decision Gideon v. Wainwright, many will lament the demise of indigent defense – the many in the system who lack access to good and effective counsel, and the many who are represented by defense attorneys with indefensibly large caseloads as counties are forced to cut their budgets in the times of economic downturn, where indigent defense ranks below many other priorities.

The biggest outcome from these cuts in indigent defense is the rise of wrongful convictions – which are one of the most devastating occurrences in our legal system, for not only does it put the innocent behind  bars but it allows the guilty to go free and, in many cases, to kill or injure or terrorize again.

Jury Misconduct Gives Yolo County Man a Second Chance

12-angry-menTwo years ago, in January 2011, the Third District Court of Appeals threw out the conviction of Kyle Vigil, who received a 15-year to life sentence for his role in a drive-by shooting in Woodland, after being acquitted of the first shooting, but convicted of aiding in the subsequent drive-by gunfire with gang enhancements.

Citing jury misconduct in the form of a home experiment conducted by a juror on a crucial piece of evidence, the court overturned that conviction based on events that occurred in June of 2007 when Kyle Vigil was just 17.

Juror Hung Vehicular Homicide Case Believing Defendant “Railroaded”

crashWhen a crash on I-5 in Woodland on August 8, 2011 left three people dead and seven others with injuries – some very serious – the Yolo County District Attorney’s office put the blame on “one man and one man only,” Gubani Roderico Rosales Quinteros.

The 42-year-old faced three felony counts of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence.  The defense attorney, Chief Deputy Public Defender Allison Zuvela, called the crash a tragic accident and nothing more.   At the same time, she noted the poorly planned freeway construction zone that may have played a role.

VANGUARD COURT WATCH: “I Call Them As I See Them”

Yolo-Count-Court-Room-600By: Alexandra Rose and Catherine Woodward

On the morning of Monday March 11, 2013, in Department 4 of the Yolo County Superior Court, the domestic violence casewas set to start under Judge Rosenberg.

The Defendant is accused of the following felonies: injuring his wife, resisting an officer, attempting to remove a firearm from said officer, child abuse, and damage to power/telephone lines.  He is also accused of a misdemeanor for injuring a wireless connection device.

Santa Clara DA’s Conviction Integrity Unit Draws Praise From Reform Advocates

witness-idIn early 2011, then newly-elected Santa Clara District Attorney, Jeff Rosen, created a Conviction Integrity Unit.  Led by prosecutor David Angel, the department was set up to review cases of alleged prosecutorial misconduct and create policies to prevent errors.

In a statement at the time, Mr. Rosen said, “Integrity is central to the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office. We will protect defendants’ rights, even as we justly prosecute them. For a prosecutor, the ends never justify the means, we do the right thing, and we do it the right way.”

VANGUARD COURT WATCH: Davis Man Acquitted of Hate Crime

hate-crimeBy Vanguard Court Watch Interns

Kevin McCarty’s trial came to a close on Monday afternoon, when the jury found him guilty of misdemeanor resisting arrest and obstructing a public officer. He was found not guilty of the other counts, including battery of an officer, battery of another person, and a hate crime.

In the early morning hours of May 18, 2012, Mr. McCarty had been celebrating his 21st birthday at Tres Hermanas in Davis when he got into a bar fight with an acquaintance. The victim was identified as a Sikh and wears a turban. During the commotion, the victim’s turban was knocked off when Mr. McCarty took a swing at him. Mr. McCarty, who had blacked out, later refused to cooperate with police. In attempts to restrain him, police slammed Mr. McCarty to the ground and he was knocked out.

Eye on the Courts: Race and Police Misconduct

racial-profiling“In both cases, the mistreatment of residents stemmed from Davis police officers assuming crimes had taken place and they knew who was guilty – before conducting investigations,” Rich Rifkin writes in his Wednesday, March 6, 2013 column in the Davis Enterprise.

He continues, “They failed to treat residents of our community with respect. They acted aggressively, intemperately and without regard for justice.”