John Chiv: Defense wants acquittal on two counts; people file 2nd amended information

Oct 27, 2022

Defense wants acquittal on two counts; people file 2nd amended information

A second amended motion filed by the People was granted during jury trial for alleged gang member Isreal Nathaniel Soria.

Defense filed an amended defense motion for judgement of acquittal per PC 1118.1 pertaining to Counts 1 and 3 of the first amended information.

Jury left today shortly before 11:30. Closing arguments are expected to start tomorrow.

At 11:30 the morning court session ended. Jurors left. Prosecutors walked out. Soria went briefly to a conference room with his attorney, then back in the courtroom to get a laptop.

Deputy District Attorneys Trent Timm and Luke Bernthal are the trial prosecutors. Ms. Christina Ann-Marie DiEdoardo is Soria's attorney. Soria is out of custody.

Soria refused a plea for 32 years in prison. He testified. When a defendant takes the stand, there is cross examination. Let's see how this works for Soria. In at least two high profile Humboldt cases, that tactic backfired on Demetrius Coleman in the Johnny Renfro homicide and on Jon Goldberg for the murder of Tim Smith.

Each case and jury are different. The Jon Goldberg case was prosecuted by the same two prosecutors. I have my observations about this jury, in and outside court. No one can predict a 100 percent the outcome of a case because juries are not cookie cutter. I have not covered this case in detail or daily because the gist of the case was summed up well in opening statements.

Mr. Timm is an excellent prosecutor and he has successfully held many criminals accountable. He has an excellent grasp of the law. The strength and outcome of a case depends on many other factors including law enforcement and witness credibility and evidence. A defendant backtracking previous statements under cross examination does not bode well for Soria.

From Case text:

Section 1118.1 - Acquittal at close of prosecution evidence in case tried before jury

In a case tried before a jury, the court on motion of the defendant or on its own motion, at the close of the evidence on either side and before the case is submitted to the jury for decision, shall order the entry of a judgment of acquittal of one or more of the offenses charged in the accusatory pleading if the evidence then before the court is insufficient to sustain a conviction of such offense or offenses on appeal. If such a motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the evidence offered by the prosecution is not granted, the defendant may offer evidence without first having reserved that right.

Ca. Pen. Code § 1118.1

Second amended information: