Attorney Mark Anthony Raimondo was asked about the Wendy Howard verdict. Read Below
Ink and headlines splashed Wendy Howard’s verdict across pages and screens after jurors acquitted her of first- and second-degree murder but deadlocked on voluntary manslaughter.
After a hung jury, the Kern County District Attorney’s Office could retry Howard for voluntary manslaughter, and a Friday hearing was held to determine Howard’s fate. During a 10-day trial, Howard testified she shot her ex-partner, Kelly Pitts, in self-defense after he sexually and physically abused herself and her children. Prosecutors said she sought vengeance and enacted “vigilante justice” when killing him.
But then defense attorney Tony Lidgett said during the hearing Howard has actually been acquitted of every charge, and prosecutors cannot relitigate the same facts. He then entered a “once in jeopardy plea” and Friday’s hearing concluded.
Lidgett’s response stems from various decisions made by attorneys and Kern County Superior Court Judge Charles Brehmer during trial and when instructing jurors about the case. These moves are uncommon and unique, said local defense attorneys.
“I’ve never seen it done before,” defense attorney Mark Anthony Raimondo said of Howard’s trial.
THE CASE
Howard was in a relationship with Pitts during which he strangled her, beat her and attempted to rape her, she previously testified in her own defense.
But she escaped, and didn’t encounter him again until 14 years later in 2019. That’s when she found out that their daughter, Bayley Frost, suffered sexual abuse from her father in her mid-teens.
The Tehachapi Police Department launched an investigation into Frost’s allegations about her father. They told Howard and her family to act nonchalant around Pitts to ensure he remained unaware of their investigation.
Pitts, who lived on the same street as Howard in Tehachapi, asked June 5, 2019 if he could bring his grandson to her house to play with her children. Howard said yes.
Prior to Pitts arriving, Howard testified, she learned about another victim who also endured sexual abuse by Pitts.
Howard and Frost discussed confronting Pitts with the evidence of his molestation of Frost, and Howard put a gun in her waistband. She met him outside, and eventually shot him.
Chief Deputy District Attorney Eric Smith said Howard’s anger at Pitts bubbled and overwhelmed before she shot Pitts. He showed text messages of her emotions prior to Pitts dying, and said she wanted to exact justice upon the man who abused her.
Howard testified she shot Pitts because she feared him after enduring abuse at his hands. She also testified she wanted to protect her children who were close by.
Jurors, after the 10-day trial, acquitted Howard on Oct. 21 of involuntary manslaughter in addition to first- and second-degree murder. However, jurors had two options when weighing voluntary manslaughter: they could find her guilty of that charge done in imperfect self-defense, or done in the heat of passion.
Seven jurors thought her guilty of voluntary manslaughter in the heat of passion, while five sought an acquittal. She was acquitted of voluntary manslaughter in imperfect self-defense.
A gag order bars attorneys from speaking on the case.
LEGAL PROCEDURE
It’s very uncommon for jurors to be allowed to weigh separately the components of voluntary manslaughter, local defense attorneys not involved in this case said.
Typically, jurors will consider voluntary manslaughter as one charge. But Brehmer dividing the charge is something defense attorney Raimondo has never seen.
”It doesn’t come up often,” agreed local defense attorney Jared Thompson.
The dual charge is what enabled Howard’s defense attorney, Lidgett, to enter a once in jeopardy plea.
Lidgett said during Friday’s hearing he’s been talking with defense attorneys and appellate lawyers about this case and Howard has been acquitted of voluntary manslaughter. That’s because jurors already returned with a not guilty verdict on that charge, and therefore the DA shouldn’t be able to relitigate the same facts, defense attorneys said.
A once in jeopardy plea stems from the U.S. Constitution and California Constitution, Raimondo said. It’s to ensure that defendants cannot be retried on the same charges when they’ve been acquitted of them, attorneys explained. Exceptions to this rule could happen if there’s jury tampering or bribery.
“It’s a very, very complicated issue,” Raimondo said.
A motions date was set for Feb. 21 for Lidgett to argue how a once in jeopardy plea should stick in this case. Brehmer said during the hearing the attorneys had an “extensive” conversation about a resolution to the case, but couldn’t come up with one. He didn’t address the issue further.
Lidgett could request the appellate court to step in if Brehmer denies the motion. He could argue how an open plea sticks to this case and 5th District Court of Appeal judges could vacate the trial court’s decision based on this argument, Thompson said.
If an appeal is filed, a trial wouldn’t happen until a decision is handed down.
But Raimondo also doesn’t see the DA trying to retry Howard for voluntary manslaughter — Howard could get on the stand and say the killing was planned, he said.
“The DA spends her whole career trying to prove people did not act in the heat of passion,” Raimondo said. “It would be very, very difficult for them to argue in the heat of passion.”
Full Story Here: https://www.bakersfield.com/news/uncommon-legal-questions-arise-in-wendy-howard-trial/article_1fafb584-72c2-11ed-bba5-37532466b6d6.html
Attorney: Sex assault suspect has mentality of 12-year-old
BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KGET) — A 24-year-old man accused of attempting to rape a woman has the mentality of an 12-year-old and his actions may have been misinterpreted, an attorney said.
Anton Hill suffers from severe epileptic seizures and had a stroke when he was 12 in which his brain stopped developing, attorney Mark Anthony Raimondo said Tuesday during Hill’s arraignment. Raimondo entered a not guilty plea on Hill’s behalf and requested he be examined by a psychologist to determine if he understands the charges against him.
Attorney Mark Anthony Raimondo says sexual assault suspect Anton Hill has the mentality of an 12-year-old.
Superior Court Judge Colette M. Humphrey suspended criminal proceedings and set a competency hearing for March 7. Hill is being held without bail.
“I think this was some type of incident that he was suffering from some kind of mental stroke or some kind of mental epileptic seizure that resulted in some conduct that really scared somebody,” Raimondo said afterward. He said Hill can barely read and write and is cared for by his mother. No prior cases are listed against him on the Superior Court website.
There is no relation between Hill and the alleged victim, who reported she was exercising on Panorama Drive near Morning Drive on Thursday when she was attacked from behind and sexually assaulted, police said. A witness followed Hill and directed officers to him, police said.
full article here https://www.kget.com/news/crime-watch/attorney-sex-assault-suspect-has-mentality-of-11-year-old/
Mark Anthony Raimondo speaks on Kevin McCarthy
CNN’s Kyung Lah speaks to several Kevin McCarthy constituents in Bakersfield, California, as he battles for House speakership.
Full article here on CNN: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2023/01/03/kevin-mccarthy-bakersfield-constituents-house-speaker-lah-pkg-ebof-vpx.cnn
‘Uncommon’ legal questions arise in Wendy Howard trial
Attorney Mark Anthony Raimondo was asked about the Wendy Howard verdict. Read Below
Ink and headlines splashed Wendy Howard’s verdict across pages and screens after jurors acquitted her of first- and second-degree murder but deadlocked on voluntary manslaughter.
After a hung jury, the Kern County District Attorney’s Office could retry Howard for voluntary manslaughter, and a Friday hearing was held to determine Howard’s fate. During a 10-day trial, Howard testified she shot her ex-partner, Kelly Pitts, in self-defense after he sexually and physically abused herself and her children. Prosecutors said she sought vengeance and enacted “vigilante justice” when killing him.
But then defense attorney Tony Lidgett said during the hearing Howard has actually been acquitted of every charge, and prosecutors cannot relitigate the same facts. He then entered a “once in jeopardy plea” and Friday’s hearing concluded.
Lidgett’s response stems from various decisions made by attorneys and Kern County Superior Court Judge Charles Brehmer during trial and when instructing jurors about the case. These moves are uncommon and unique, said local defense attorneys.
“I’ve never seen it done before,” defense attorney Mark Anthony Raimondo said of Howard’s trial.
THE CASE
Howard was in a relationship with Pitts during which he strangled her, beat her and attempted to rape her, she previously testified in her own defense.
But she escaped, and didn’t encounter him again until 14 years later in 2019. That’s when she found out that their daughter, Bayley Frost, suffered sexual abuse from her father in her mid-teens.
The Tehachapi Police Department launched an investigation into Frost’s allegations about her father. They told Howard and her family to act nonchalant around Pitts to ensure he remained unaware of their investigation.
Pitts, who lived on the same street as Howard in Tehachapi, asked June 5, 2019 if he could bring his grandson to her house to play with her children. Howard said yes.
Prior to Pitts arriving, Howard testified, she learned about another victim who also endured sexual abuse by Pitts.
Howard and Frost discussed confronting Pitts with the evidence of his molestation of Frost, and Howard put a gun in her waistband. She met him outside, and eventually shot him.
Chief Deputy District Attorney Eric Smith said Howard’s anger at Pitts bubbled and overwhelmed before she shot Pitts. He showed text messages of her emotions prior to Pitts dying, and said she wanted to exact justice upon the man who abused her.
Howard testified she shot Pitts because she feared him after enduring abuse at his hands. She also testified she wanted to protect her children who were close by.
Jurors, after the 10-day trial, acquitted Howard on Oct. 21 of involuntary manslaughter in addition to first- and second-degree murder. However, jurors had two options when weighing voluntary manslaughter: they could find her guilty of that charge done in imperfect self-defense, or done in the heat of passion.
Seven jurors thought her guilty of voluntary manslaughter in the heat of passion, while five sought an acquittal. She was acquitted of voluntary manslaughter in imperfect self-defense.
A gag order bars attorneys from speaking on the case.
LEGAL PROCEDURE
It’s very uncommon for jurors to be allowed to weigh separately the components of voluntary manslaughter, local defense attorneys not involved in this case said.
Typically, jurors will consider voluntary manslaughter as one charge. But Brehmer dividing the charge is something defense attorney Raimondo has never seen.
”It doesn’t come up often,” agreed local defense attorney Jared Thompson.
The dual charge is what enabled Howard’s defense attorney, Lidgett, to enter a once in jeopardy plea.
Lidgett said during Friday’s hearing he’s been talking with defense attorneys and appellate lawyers about this case and Howard has been acquitted of voluntary manslaughter. That’s because jurors already returned with a not guilty verdict on that charge, and therefore the DA shouldn’t be able to relitigate the same facts, defense attorneys said.
A once in jeopardy plea stems from the U.S. Constitution and California Constitution, Raimondo said. It’s to ensure that defendants cannot be retried on the same charges when they’ve been acquitted of them, attorneys explained. Exceptions to this rule could happen if there’s jury tampering or bribery.
“It’s a very, very complicated issue,” Raimondo said.
A motions date was set for Feb. 21 for Lidgett to argue how a once in jeopardy plea should stick in this case. Brehmer said during the hearing the attorneys had an “extensive” conversation about a resolution to the case, but couldn’t come up with one. He didn’t address the issue further.
Lidgett could request the appellate court to step in if Brehmer denies the motion. He could argue how an open plea sticks to this case and 5th District Court of Appeal judges could vacate the trial court’s decision based on this argument, Thompson said.
If an appeal is filed, a trial wouldn’t happen until a decision is handed down.
But Raimondo also doesn’t see the DA trying to retry Howard for voluntary manslaughter — Howard could get on the stand and say the killing was planned, he said.
“The DA spends her whole career trying to prove people did not act in the heat of passion,” Raimondo said. “It would be very, very difficult for them to argue in the heat of passion.”
Full Story Here: https://www.bakersfield.com/news/uncommon-legal-questions-arise-in-wendy-howard-trial/article_1fafb584-72c2-11ed-bba5-37532466b6d6.html
Bakersfield Man sentenced in child sex sting
BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KGET) — A man who pleaded no contest to contacting a minor with the intent to commit a sex act was sentenced Thursday to two years’ probation, 300 hours of community service and ordered to register as a sex offender, according to court records.
Francisco Ceja, one of several men arrested during a sting in which Bakersfield police detectives posed as a minor online, pleaded no contest to the charge last month.
Ceja and the others, believing they were communicating with a minor, made inappropriate statements, arranged to meet and were arrested when they showed up at the meeting place, police said.
https://www.kget.com/news/crime-watch/francisco-ceja-child-sex-sting-sentencing-bakersfield-offender/
Q&A: How does the grand jury process work?
Woman caught on camera kicking dog, lawyer says could face charges
Man acquitted of felony charges stemming from Bakersfield Speedway fight
BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KGET) — A Kern County jury has found a man not guilty of two felony assault charges filed in connection with a fight at Bakersfield Speedway three years ago that left a man with serious head injuries.
The jury on Thursday acquitted Kyle Flippo of assault on a person with force likely to produce great bodily injury and battery with serious bodily injury.
Flippo’s attorney, Mark Anthony Raimondo, said Flippo was relieved following the verdict. He’s the sole breadwinner for his family and faced seven years in prison if convicted.
Flippo was protecting his mother when he punched Zachary Diamond at the race track June 9, 2018, Raimondo said.
“Before there were any manmade laws, there was a law you could defend your mom,” the attorney said.
Prosecutor Cyrus Shahbazian said it was a difficult case with a lot of evidence — the trial lasted three weeks — and the jury worked hard. While he’s disappointed with the outcome, he said he appreciates the work the jurors put in.
“We fully supported the victim’s family and the victim himself and he’s doing much better now,” Shahbazian said. “They want to put this past them.”
Flippo was arrested after a melee involving multiple people at the track following a Mod Lites feature race.
During the fight, Flippo hit Zachary Diamond, who fell backward, hit his head and lost consciousness. Diamond was taken to a hospital and was mostly unresponsive in the days after the incident, according to his family.
Raimondo said Diamond’s parents instigated the fight. Diamond rushed into the fracas and hit Flippo’s father then glared at Flippo’s mother, the attorney said.
Flippo threw one punch at Diamond, striking him on the chin.
“The damage to Mr. Diamond was not from the punch,” Raimondo said. “There was no swelling or bruising on his chin. It was the fall on the ground that hurt him.”
Raimondo said he’s sorry Diamond was injured, but sorrier his parents provoked the altercation. The blame lies with them, he said.
Diamond’s mother filed a lawsuit against Flippo, the owner of Bakersfield Speedway and others connected to the track. A hearing regarding the suit is scheduled in August.
Source: https://www.kget.com/news/crime-watch/man-acquitted-of-felony-charges-stemming-from-bakersfield-speedway-fight/
Bakersfield Tee Fore Three Charity Golf Sponsorship
Crime Victims’ Rights Week began with a golf tournament sponsored by KLEA (Kern Law Enforcement Association) and Bakersfield 3 Moms to benefit Kern Secret Witness. The community turned out to support crime victims and their families. KLEA (Kern Law Enforcement Association) Bakersfield Police Officers Association-BPOA
Judge dismisses attempted murder, torture charges against Bakersfield couple accused of injuring 11-month-old
BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KGET) — A judge on Friday dismissed charges of attempted murder and torture against a couple accused of inflicting injuries on their 11-month-old boy that included bleeding on the brain.
Gerson Avalos and Sierra Castilleja were each ordered, however, to stand trial on a charge of willful cruelty to a child. The judge did not find sufficient evidence to support the other charges, which carry life terms in prison.
The two are next due in court March 23.
Prosecutor Garrett Rice said afterward other charges will be filed against the two, and they will face about 12 years in prison if convicted.
He said the judge’s ruling wasn’t entirely unexpected as the evidence showed Avalos and Castilleja knew what they were doing and that it would hurt the child, but it didn’t show they wanted the child to die.
Castilleja’s attorney, Mark Anthony Raimondo, said he was “very, very pleased” with the judge’s ruling.
“It’s a best case scenario for a (preliminary hearing),” he said.
There was no evidence to support the torture and attempted murder charges, Raimondo said. Castilleja’s family continues to support her, and the child is now doing fine, he said.
According to a court document filed by Bakersfield police, the child was crying early Nov. 8 when Avalos grabbed the child from a couch, violently shook him then threw him onto a tile floor.
The child hit his head on the couch and the floor, the document says. Castilleja took the boy to a neighbor, where an ambulance was called. Doctors diagnosed the child as having a severe brain bleed, according to the document.
“Doctors also discovered the victim was covered in fresh bruises, and several bruises were in the healing stages, suggesting ongoing abuse/torture,” investigators said in the document.
Story : Click To Read
Kern County Courts are Open during COVID-19 outbreak.
“Do I need to appear in my criminal case in the Kern County court during the COVID 19 outbreak?”, is the most common question we are asked.
The Kern County courthouse is basically closed for non-essential purposes; please see their website https://www.kern.courts.ca.gov, for a full list.
There are cases the court must hear. If you are arrested, you must be brought to court for arrangements. In custody arraignment are now 7 days out.
For criminal cases the court does not want you there in person rather you sign a form and let the attorney appear for you via phone, which we are authorized to do.
Our local courts have been very cooperative and most non-essential matters are going to be postponed. If you have a criminal matters, you will still need to follow rules on the courts website or be represented by an attorney.
During the Emergency Temporary Order put in place starting March 19th, 2020 through March 31st, 2020, all criminal matters can be handled without you having to be in court if you have an attorney, otherwise you must appear.
If you have flu-like symptoms, or the any possible connection to corona virus, instead of coming to court you are encouraged to conduct your judicial business online or through an attorney.
The Law Office of Mark Anthony Raimondo is open and available for your assistance. Due to the current Federal, State, and Local recommendations we would prefer telephone contacts. Call us- (661) 827-8000. Walk-ins or live appointments are going to be greatly limited.
We can protect your rights throughout this ordeal. The Court would prefer you to not go to the courthouse and will allow us to APPEAR FOR YOU. We will be holding all of our consultations by normal procedures,–just simply call to set up or answer your questions.
Any Documents that you may want to send us can be sent via-email (bakersfieldcriminaldefense@gmail.com or fax (661) 381-6594).
Thank you for your understanding in this historic time. Let’s all keep safe.