Oct 15, 2015

Rodney Ortiz hires one of the top private attorneys, retired Judge from Yolo County assigned to Ortiz case

Today a disposition and reset hearing is scheduled for 2 p.m. this afternoon in the Rodney and Vincent Ortiz cases. A jury trial is scheduled for January 11, 2016 but both defense attorneys at the last hearing suggested that might not be set in stone.

There have been some developments since the last hearing.

There has been an order appointing Steven L. Mock, a retired Judge from Yolo County to the Ortiz case.

Rodney Ortiz has retained a private attorney, Mr. Neal Sanders. His previous attorney, Public Defender Casey Russo had filed a motion to dismiss Counts 2 and 3. The People are opposing that motion. This is scheduled to be heard today.


Sep 6, 2015

No severance for you" Defense motion to sever denied by Judge Johnson; defense quote of the day: ""Judicial economy should not trump my client's right to a fair trial."

To sever or not to sever, that was the question, Visiting Judge Arvid Johnson ruled in favor of the People and denied the motion to sever on September 4 and the Rodney and Vincent Ortiz cases remained joined. The prosecutor for this case is Deputy District Attorney Jackie Pizzo. Conflict Counsel's Mr. Greg Elvine-Kreis has been appointed to represent Vincent Ortiz. Public Defender Mr. Casey Russo has been appointed to represent Rodney Ortiz.

Only one Ortiz family member was in Courtroom 4 on Friday. Judge Johnson said, "The Court has read both the defense motions and the People's responses." He then allowed the attorneys to present oral arguments, during which, each attorney highlighted their reasons.

Mr. Russo referred to the Aranda Bruton rule and said it only applies to a confession. He cited People v Anderson where he said "statement and confession was used interchangeably. The prosecution is correct that statements are not testimonial. The DA has to get the statements in via hearsay exception." Mr. Russo then referred to People v Arceo. Unless People say they won't admit statements, we want a severance."

Mr. Elvine-Kreis said, "The two areas I am hoping the Court will focus on is association, People v Anderson. If there were separate trials, my client would be exonerated.Judge Miles agreed only one charge stands against my client. The evidence against my client is weak. Evidence against co-defendant will be used against my client by inferences."

"People are saying the jury can be asked to disregard. My client cannot get a fair trial." Then Mr. Elvine-Kreis referred to Cauldron v Superior Court. "Strong evidence against one defendant can be used to bolster a case against a weak defendant. If we have trials together, they will convict my client by inference."

Judge Johnson responded, "Even if we had separate trials, it depends on who goes first." Mr. Elvine-Kreis acknowledged that fact and that his client had a 50 % chance, then aid, "Yes. But  a 100% chance if my client goes later." Mr. Elvine-Kreis said he would file paperwork to ensure Vincent Ortiz goes after Rodney Ortiz.

Ms. Pizzo got her chance next. "Your honor, I think the only thing that makes sense is to have a joint trial. They were charged as joined  before the preliminary hearing. They are charged with the same charges against three victims. Vincent Ortiz's motion about disparity of evidence, the defense can argue whatever they like. The People's case is the same. It's like putting on two different trials when they are both charged with events happening the same day, same time, with the same charges. There is no evidence that is only going towards Mr. Rodney Ortiz."

"I ask the Court to deny the severance. Regarding Mr. Russo's Aranda Bruton motion, I 'm sure there will be numerous 402 hearings. We don;t have any statements like, "me and the co-defendant" in this case. I think there are hearsay exceptions. That is an issue for the trial Judge, not this court."

Before Judge Johnson, made his ruling, Mr. Elvine-Kreis said, "Judicial economy should not trump my client's right to a fair trial."

"The problem with one of your comments about Judge Miles," said Judge Johnson directing his remarks to Mr. Elvine-Kreis, "and I am not casting aspersions about Judge Miles' decision, is that you think Judges who have experience should try cases instead of a jury." Judge Johnson remarked on the importance of the jury in a criminal justice system, and about being judged by your peers. "That's what a good defense attorney is for. The trial judge can address the Aranda Bruton and whether the statements come in or not. I agree that judicial economy should not trump your client's right to a fair trial. There is not enough disparity to justify severance."

Then Mr. Kreis said that his client wants a date set on a no time basis, Mr. Russo said 'we will not be ready in 60 days." Ms. Pizzo said that according to PC 1050, "the Court can find good cause to continue co-defendant's case." A trial setting date and a hearing for the 995 motion is set for October 15 and a tentative jury trial date of January 11, 2016.

Fromilawdictionary.com:

In People v. Aranda, supra, 63 Cal.2d 518, 530-531 (hereafter Aranda), the California Supreme Court held that when the prosecution seeks to introduce an extrajudicial statement of one defendant that implicates a codefendant, the trial court must adopt one of three procedures:  (1) in a joint trial, effectively delete direct and indirect identifications of codefendants; (2) grant a severance of trials; or (3) if severance has been denied and effective deletion is not possible, exclude the statement.  In the absence of a holding by the United States Supreme Court, the Aranda court declared these rules were not constitutionally compelled, but judicially declared to implement the provisions for joint and separate trials of Penal Code section 1098.  (63 Cal.2d at p. 530.)
     A decision by the United States Supreme Court came three years later.  In Bruton v. United States, supra, 391 U.S. 123 [20 L.Ed.2d 476] (hereafter Bruton), the high court held that introduction of an incriminating extrajudicial statement by a codefendant violates the defendant’s right to cross-examination, even if the jury is instructed to disregard the statement in determining the defendant’s guilt or innocence.
     Aranda, supra, 63 Cal.2d 518 is now recognized as a constitutionally based doctrine, at least in part.  (People v. Mitcham (1992) 1 Cal.4th 1027, 1045.)  “To the extent Ar


Last post (with other links):

http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/09/motion-to-sever-ortiz-cases-denied.html

Sep 4, 2015


Motion to sever Ortiz cases denied

The motion to sever the Rodney and Vincent Ortiz cases was denied by Visiting Judge Johnson.

No other media was in court. As usual, the hearing wasn't simple since Vincent Ortiz did not waive time but Rodney Ortiz has and his attorney, Public Defender Casey Russo said that they could not be ready within 60 days for  atrial. There were good arguments by all attorneys on the motion to sever, the People prevailed.

I will do a separate posts on those arguments.

The September 25 trial date was vacated and an October 15 trial date was scheduled for setting and hearing the 995 motion by a Visiting Judge in a courtroom to be assigned. A tentative date of January 11 for the jury trial is set.

Visiting Judge Arvid Johnson is subbing for Judge Timothy Cissna this week in Courtroom 4. Deputy District Attorney Jackie Pizzo is prosecuting the cases for the People. Public Defender  Casey Russo represents Rodney Ortiz and Conflict Counsel's Greg Elvine-Kreis represents Vincent Ortiz.

Last post (with background and other links):

johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/09/ortiz-motion-to-sever-and-995-motion.html

Sep 2, 2015


Ortiz motion to sever and 995 motion continued until Friday

This afternoon in Courtroom 4 there is a motion to sever filed in both the Rodney and Vincent Ortiz cases as well as a 995 motion for Rodney Ortiz set for September 25.

Today's hearing continued until September 4 at 2 p.m.



Aug 13, 2015


Discovery issues in Ortiz case delayed due to fire situation, Rodney Ortiz files motion to sever

Next court date is September 2 at 2 p.m. in Courtroom 5 to hear Rodney Ortiz's motion to sever. And to set new jury trial date. Vincent Ortiz has still not waived time.

Visiting Judge Arvid Johnson was in Courtroom 5 today to deal with discovery issues. Deputy District Attorney Jackie Pizzo was present for the People, Public Defender Casey Russo for Rodney Ortiz and Mr. Marek Reavis subbed in for his colleague, Mr. Greg Elvine-Kreis for Vincent Ortiz.

Fire situation locally has delayed some documents being provided to the District Attorney's office. Two envelopes, one from the Mercy medical Center, were provided to Ms. Pizzo to copy and provide to both defense attorneys.


Two writs filed on behalf of Vincent Ortiz denied in August.

The procedural saga continues.

Last post :

Jul 9, 2015


Rodney and Vincent Ortiz homicide jury trial stayed while Rodney Ortiz's attorney files writ appealing 995 ruling

This afternoon at 2 p.m. Visiting Judge Bob McNatt was scheduled  to
hear the defense motion to continue for Rodney Ortiz and a trial confirmation hearing is set for both Rodney and Vincent Ortiz. Jury trial was set for July 20. That date has been vacated.

 Next court date is disposition and reset hearing on August 13 in Courtroom 2.

The motion to continue for Rodney Ortiz will also be discussed further on that date. Rodney Ortiz's attorney Mr. Casey Russo said they wanted 4 to 6 months for investigation and "further discovery".

Vincent Ortiz refused to waive time for a continuance but the stay is a "defacto waiver", at least until the next court hearing said Visiting Judge McNatt.

The father and son are charged in a Hoopa shooting that resulted in the death of Daniel Colegrove, and attempted murder charges for Francis Colegrove and Roger Surber.

Judge Philip Schafer has not yet ruled on the 995 motion to dismiss certain charges against Vincent Ortiz. A date of 7/14 to hear a motion for discovery seems to be gone from the court system.

Previous posts:

This link is to the post on the 995 motion:

http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/07/things-escalated-at-spur-of-moment-when.html

This link is on the last court hearing and will get you caught up with other links to the case:

http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/07/defense-motion-to-continue-rodney-ortiz.html

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.