Yolo County

By David M. Greenwald

Last week, the mother of Michael Perez, Regina Roxanne Perez, was acquitted of perjury stemming from answers she gave in response to a jury questionnaire for the Marco Topete trial back in 2011.  A week later, Michael Perez, whose 2001 murder conviction was overturned in 2010 and sent back to Yolo County, was in Yolo County court and copped to a reduced plea.

Mr. Perez pled no contest to second degree murder and a reduced enhancement for personal use of a firmarm.  He would receive from Judge Mock an 18-year to life sentence.  With his time in custody since 2001, he will be eligible for parole in the relatively near future.

A Woodland man, Justin Garcia, will face trial on charges of kidnapping, false imprisonment, child endangerment and resisting arrest following Judge Fall’s ruling after a preliminary hearing on Friday, which showed wildly divergent testimony between YONET officers who arrested Mr. Garcia on November 10, 2012, and eyewitness accounts of the supposed victims.

Judge Fall called the kidnapping charges unusual in that they involved fear rather than force, but noted that the statute does not require a particular level of fear that compels the victim to comply.  He said it will be up to a jury to determine whether the facts in this case constitute kidnapping and false imprisonment.

The Vanguard this week will file a motion with the court, intervening to keep the courtroom open for the murder trial of Daniel Marsh.  The Davis Enterprise and Sacramento Bee have already indicated they will be filing motions, as well.

We understand the rationale for the defense’s motion.  His attorney believes that the media coverage, which includes the prominence of the victims in the Davis community and details about his family’s troubles and mental health history, has made it difficult for him to receive a fair trial.

When the jury spent less than one hour deliberating before clearing Regina Roxanne Perez of perjury after she had been a prospective juror in the 2011-12 Marco Topete death penalty case, we were left with the question as to why the District Attorney’s office would spend time and taxpayer money pursuing this case.

Unfortunately, there are more questions than answers here.

The recent defense motion by Deputy Public Defender Ron Johnson that seeks to exclude the public from 16-year-old defendant Daniel Marsh’s preliminary hearing puts us in a quandary.  Mr. Marsh stands accused in the double homicides of Oliver “Chip” Northup and Claudia Maupin of Davis.

On the one hand, the Vanguard has fought for open government and believes that transparency is a fundamental core value in a functioning democracy.  If the government wishes to take away the liberty of a citizen, then it has to do so in a very open and transparent manner where all can see, monitor and scrutinize.

On Tuesday, defendant Roxanne Perez was acquitted by a Yolo County jury of a perjury charge based on what the district attorney’s office tried to claim represented untruthful answers on a survey and during voir dire for the trial of Marco Topete.  Mr. Topete was ultimately found guilty of the 2008 murder of Sheriff’s Deputy Tony Diaz and sentenced to the death penalty.

During the lengthy jury selection process of the Topete trial in 2011, that was interrupted by the illness of Defense Attorney Tom Purtell, Roxanne Perez filled out her jury form and then was questioned about whether the fact that her son was convicted of a crime and serving prison time would influence her ability to render a fair verdict.

Holder Calls for an End to the Cycle of Poverty and Incarceration – In a continued signal of détente for the criminal justice system, US Attorney General Eric Holder made sweeping changes to the federal sentencing requirements by ordering federal prosecutors to cease listing the quantity of drugs in low-level drug cases, enabling them to sidestep federal laws that impose lengthy mandatory minimum sentencing requirements for possession of drugs and other related offenses.

In a speech at the American Bar Association’s annual meeting in San Francisco, Mr. Holder laid out his new policy which aims at modifying the Justice Department’s charging policies “so that certain low-level, nonviolent drug offenders who have no ties to large-scale organizations, gangs, or cartels will no longer be charged with offenses that impose draconian mandatory minimum sentences.”

In a long-anticipated and awaited ruling, a federal judge – Shira Scheindlin – ruled that the New York Police Department’s “stop-and-frisk” policies violated the constitutional rights of minorities in the city.

Judge Scheindlin ruled that the city had “adopted a policy of indirect racial profiling by targeting racially defined groups for stops based on local crime suspect data. This has resulted in the disproportionate and discriminatory stopping of blacks and Hispanics in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.”

A recent statewide publication trumpeted the DA’s Neighborhood Court program, stating that Davis has earned another distinction, “becoming the second California city to institute a restorative justice program to deal with misdemeanors as an alternative to the traditional court system.”

Yolo County has earned a lot of mileage from the program. DA Jeff Reisig notes that “courts are overcrowded, the system is costly, and there are too few judges and too few courtrooms.”

No one, not even his own attorney, can deny that Tom Vukodinovich made a string of very bad judgment calls.  He abused his charge that he was hired to do when he turned his position of authority and responsibility and used it to engage in at least a two-year string of sexual liaisons with a developmentally disabled woman, who the prosecution said had an IQ of 37.

But would justice have been served if Mr. Vukodinovich, who is 74 years of age anyway, were simply relieved of his duties and not allowed to serve in the capacity of bus driver anymore?  That was a decision that the Yolo County District Attorney’s Office had to make.

By Dan Williams

The jury remained in deliberation for most of the day. The question on their minds was not if the alleged actions took place, but rather if the victim was mentally able to give consent; and if she was, whether she communicated it.

The issue that this case raises is an interesting one. The outcome of this case could set a dangerous precedent. We could be seeing what is essentially an IQ floor on sexual relationships and consent. Now, I’m not saying that anybody who’s ever had the privilege of being a sexual partner of dim-witted cousin Skeeter is at risk of being thrown on the sex offender list; but this is something we should be concerned about with regard to those who have issues communicating, and to their biological urges.

Thomas Vukodinovich faces 57 felony charges for a sexual relationship he had with a 49-year-old developmentally disabled woman, who the prosecution says has an IQ of 37 and is considered moderately retarded.  Mr. Vukodinovich was the bus driver in charge of transporting disabled individuals to work.

According to the prosecution, he used this bus to drive the alleged victim to a number of secluded locations throughout Yolo and Solano County to have sexual relations with her and then warned her that if she reported him that he would get in trouble, be arrested and lose his job.

When a person is wrongly convicted for a crime, there is the presumption that the process broke down.  Often we look to prosecutorial misconduct, mistakes by investigators and ineffectual defense.  As this year was the 50^th anniversary of the seminal Supreme Court decision, Gideon v. Wainwright, there has been much attention focused on the decline of indigent defense.

We have found that public defense is strained by declining budgets, high workloads and other problems.

There was a time when DUI convictions, even for accidents that caused the deaths of innocents, were given small prison terms, virtual slaps on the wrist.  One of the great success stories has been the rise of the power of the MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) lobby.  In this county, even accidents not involving alcohol have been treated at times as vehicular manslaughter.

A few years ago we saw a case before Judge Fall, where an elderly woman driving in a parking lot was given gross vehicular manslaughter when she killed a pedestrian.  In a more recent case, Judge Mock in a court trial ruled that ten seconds of inattentiveness by the driver of a delivery truck that slammed into stopped traffic on I-5 warranted vehicular manslaughter, but without the gross negligence component.

In early June, former Dixon High JV Football Coach Troy Hensley, 37, was arrested for allegedly engaging in a sexual relationship with, and later threatening, a 17-year-old Dixon resident, over a 3 1/2-month period in 2012 at multiple locations in Davis, according to a release from the Davis Police Department.

However, our attention focused on the incident when the Dixon Patch published a story entitled, “Did Dixon’s Vice Mayor Influence Bail Reduction for Hensley’s Release?”