Guilty plea expected in case of Golden State Killer, East Area Rapist suspect Joseph DeAngelo

Joseph DeAngelo, the man arrested in 2018 on suspicion of a string of kidnappings, rapes and murders stemming from his time as a police officer in the 1970s and 1980s, is expected to formally enter a guilty plea to some of those charges during a court hearing on Monday.

But the hearing won’t happen in a typical courtroom. Instead, prosecutors have announced the hearing will take place inside a large ballroom at the California State University’s Sacramento campus.

Legal experts speculate the unusual move was made to accommodate more than 100 families and friends of the Golden State Killer and East Area Rapist’s victims, some of whom are expected to make impact statements during the hearing.

California criminal defense attorney and legal expert Mark Reichel told CBS13 News the decision to hold the hearing at CSU Sacramento makes sense because “this is a highly unusual case, probably the biggest case in California history.”

Under normal circumstances, a judge would allow a certain number of victims, members of the public and news reporters into the courtroom to observe a hearing, then provide an overflow space for anyone else who wanted to attend.

Courts have been forced to modify their operating procedures in the wake of the global health crisis brought on by the novel coronavirus COVID-19.

“I think it is driven by the [coronavirus] epidemic,” Reichel said in another interview with FOX40 News. “Normally, they would allow a certain amount of people in the courtroom.”

To ensure those who want to attend in person can, the ballroom at CSU Sacramento was selected so that court officials could accommodate the family and friends while attempting to adhere to social distancing rules and other guidelines that have been put in place in public spaces throughout California.

No matter where the hearing takes place, Mark hopes a guilty plea will spare victims the experience of having to go through a lengthy trial.

“Now we have a guilty plea, I think that’s what’s going to happen. We have a guilty plea. We have a guilty finding,” Mark said. “No more trial. No more guessing. No more speculation. No more fighting. That type of finality is probably good for everyone.”

Golden State Killer suspect Joseph DeAngelo expected to plead guilty

The man suspected of carrying out a string of burglaries, rapes and murders in the 1970s and 1980s is expected to enter a guilty plea at a court hearing later this month.

That guilty plea will likely spare Joseph DeAngelo from a death sentence and preserve millions of taxpayer dollars that would have been spent on a lengthy criminal trial, according to legal experts.

DeAngelo, a former police officer from Northern California, was arrested in 2018 after DNA submitted to a genealogy website reportedly match some of DeAngelo’s distant relatives. The DNA allegedly proved a link between DeAngelo and an unknown man whom police called the East Area Rapist and the Original Night Stalker.

Prosecutors charged DeAngelo with 13 counts of kidnapping and 13 counts of murder. Though he is suspected of other crimes associated with the East Area Rapist and Original Night Stalker cases, statutes of limitations in California law prevented prosecutors from seeking charges for those alleged crimes.

Rumors of a possible plea deal began swirling in early March after attorneys representing the man said they were trying to “resolve” the case.

A footnote in a supplemental court filing seeking the dismissal of certain charges said DeAngelo had offered to plead guilty to other charges in exchange for a lifetime sentence.

Court hearings were delayed due to the ongoing COVID-19 global health crisis, but as proceedings started up again, the Sacramento Bee published a report on Monday saying attorneys had been contacting victims with information about a plea deal.

The Bee’s report said the deal is still in the works and had not been finalized, and that any plea deal could collapse due to DeAngelo’s erratic nature.

Sacramento criminal defense attorney Mark Reichel told CBS13 News a plea deal would save California taxpayers a considerable amount of money and spare victims and their families from what was sure to be a lengthy trial.

“Many times, this was referred to as what was going to be the biggest trial in the history of California,” Reichel said, adding that the costs associated with litigation were expected to be around $50 million.

DeAngelo’s plea could be entered as early as June 29, which would coincide with his next court appearance.

Sacramento County Judge James Arguelles to fill Eastern District vacancy

A Sacramento County Superior Court judge has been appointed by President Donald Trump to fill a vacancy in the federal Eastern District of California.

Judge James Arguelles is the second Trump nominee within the federal judicial district. The pick comes more than a month after the president appointed Fresno attorney Dirk Paloutzian to the Eastern District’s Fresno court, which has been burdened with criminal and civil case activity due to court vacancies there.

Prior to his term as a judge in Sacramento County, Arguelles worked as a partner at the Sacramento firm Stevens, O’Connell & Jacobs. He was also an Assistant U.S. Attorney  in the Eastern District prior to entering private practice.

Speaking to the trade publication Law.com, Sacramento criminal defense attorney Mark Reichel called Arguelles’ appointment a smart pick.

“He is a very smart lawyer, is very well-rounded as a person and has relatively broad experience,” Mark said. “He is personable and kind to litigants and their lawyers, works hard. Judge Arguelles might turn out to be all that is right with lifetime appointments.”

U.S. Attorney McGregor Scott of the Eastern District of California said any presidential administration would be “hard-pressed to find someone as well-qualified as Jim Arguelles for a district court position.”

Click here to read the full story on Law.com

Three officers charged with aiding and abetting murder in George Floyd case

Three former Minneapolis police officers who were present during the arrest of an unarmed black man have been charged in connection with his subsequent death.

The charges were announced at a press conference Wednesday by Hennepin County District Attorney Mark Freeman and Minnesota State Attorney General Keith Ellison.

Court records obtained by a local news station revealed Thomas Lane, 37; Tou Thao, 34 and Alexander Kueng, 26 were each charged with one count of unintentionally aiding and abetting murder and one count of intentionally aiding and abetting manslaughter.

The charges stem from last week’s arrest of George Floyd, a Minneapolis resident who was accused by a deli employee of attempting to make a purchase with counterfeit money.

One officer, 44-year-old Derek Chauvin, was captured on video kneeling on Floyd’s neck during the arrest. Throughout the video, Floyd could be heard telling the officers he was in pain and unable to breathe.

Floyd’s lifeless body was placed on an ambulance stretcher and removed from the scene of the arrest. Video of the incident, first posted to Twitter, sparked a national outcry and led to days of protests in major cities across the country.

Last Friday, Chauvin was charged with third-degree murder and third-degree unintentional manslaughter. On Wednesday, prosecutors added a second-degree murder charge against the officer.

Earlier this week, defense attorney Mark Reichel told FOX40 News he anticipated charges against the other three officers captured on cellphone videos during Floyd’s arrest.

On Wednesday, Mark said the additional second-degree charge is a more-serious offense that could carry a lengthier prison sentence, adding that prosecutors may have more evidence proving Chauvin’s intent.

“Second-degree murder charge means [Chauvin] intended the killing at some point,” Mark told FOX40 News. “Second-degree murder in Minnesota means there was a use of force and he intended to cause bodily harm, serious bodily harm, and during it someone died.”

Mark said it was unlikely prosecutors would have prevailed in court with a third-degree murder charge because Minnesota law requires proof that a person killed more than one individual during the incident.

“Had the case stayed with the county attorney and stayed as third-degree murder, [the officer] likely would have won the case,” Mark said.

Click here to watch the full video on FOX40.com

Accomplice charges likely coming for other officers involved in George Floyd’s death

One week after an unarmed Minneapolis man died during a police encounter, community members and activists continue calling for charges against three officers who were connected to the incident.

Former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin is the only person so far to faces charges in connection with the death of George Floyd, an unarmed black man whose arrest made international headlines following his death.

A bystander to the arrest captured cellphone video showing Chauvin kneeling on Floyd’s neck during the arrest. Multiple times, Floyd could be heard telling Chauvin and other officers on scene that he was in pain and couldn’t breathe.

Floyd’s lifeless body was placed on a stretcher and taken away from the scene in an ambulance, the video shows. He was pronounced dead a short time later.

Chauvin was arrested last Friday and booked into jail on charges of manslaughter and third-degree murder. But three other officers at the scene — Thomas Lane, J.A. Kueng and Tou Thao —  have not been criminally charged in connection with Floyd’s death.

Sacramento criminal defense attorney Mark Reichel told FOX40 News on Tuesday he believes charges against the other three officers are forthcoming, and it’s simply a matter of time before prosecutors in Minnesota announce them.

“Once you’re aware a crime is being committed, if your presence is enough to prevent it from being stopped, you can be charged as an accomplice,” Mark said.

The three officers could be charged with accomplice liability — also known as aiding and abetting — for having reasonable knowledge that Chauvin was committing a crime but failing to stop it. Eyewitness video captured at the scene showed at least one officer repeatedly telling bystanders to stay out of the street while he was standing mere feet away from Chauvin and Floyd.

The video evidence is likely going to be key in charging the other three officers with accomplice liability in the future.

“It’s going to come down to, what did you see? What did you hear? What did you know?” Mark said. “It’s my understanding they’re looking at the facts right now. Some of those facts are, when were they aware there was no pulse? When were they aware those other officers are saying, roll him over…to the right side?”

In a separate but related legal action, state officials in Minnesota filed a civil rights complaint against the Minneapolis Police Department. That complaint opens the door for state investigators to comb through nearly a decade of police cases connected to the department to see if there are additional civil rights violations.

Why aren’t more police officers charged when people die?

Eyewitness video of police officer Derek Chauvin kneeling on the neck of George Floyd sent shockwaves throughout the United States and sparked demonstrations in major cities across the country, including an organized protest in Sacramento’s Oak Park neighborhood on Friday.

Their message: Police need to be held accountable for their actions and brought to justice.

It’s extremely rare for police officers to be charged when a person dies as the result of a law enforcement encounter. In Sacramento, similar protests were sparked after police officers shot and killed Stephon Clark, a 23-year-old black man who was not armed when he was confronted by officers.

After a year-long investigation, Sacramento County District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert declined to file charges against the officers involved in the Clark case.

“There was no justice or accountability for my brother,” Stevante Clark, the brother of Stephon Clark, said at Friday’s rally, according to a report. “I think we have to wait to see how this plays out to see if George Floyd gets justice because at the end of the day, transparency with accountability means nothing.”

So why aren’t more law enforcement officers charged when people die during police encounters?

“The main reason is no prosecutor, for political reasons and to get reelected, ever wants to lose a high-profile case,” Sacramento criminal defense attorney Mark Reichel told FOX40 News. “It’s better to not bring it than to lose a high-profile case and, obviously, officer-involved killings are always high-profile.”

Prosecutors typically bring cases they feel they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt, legal experts say, and juries are typically more likely to believe police officers acted out of self-defense or a sense of danger when presented with conflicting evidence or testimony.

But the video evidence in George Floyd’s death showed precisely the opposite. The videos published earlier this week didn’t just triggered protests — they also led to calls for an investigation and charges from law enforcement groups across the country.

That evidence, prosecutors in Minneapolis said, was key in bringing charges against Chauvin.

“This is by far the fastest that we’ve ever charged a police officer,” Mike Freeman, the top prosecutor in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said at a press conference.

Late Friday afternoon, U.S. Attorney William Barr said the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation were also investigating whether Floyd’s civil rights were violated.

“Both state and federal officers are working diligently and collaboratively to ensure that any available evidence relevant to these decisions is obtained as quickly as possible,” Barr said.

Click or tap here to read the full story from FOX40 News

DOJ attorney locks on to California’s coronavirus shelter-at-home orders, warns they may be illegal

A Department of Justice attorney sent two letters to officials in California warning that elements of their stay-at-home orders may impede on constitutionally-protected freedoms as well as federal law.

The letters were penned by Eric S. Dreiband, an Assistant Attorney General working in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. His latest communication with officials in California came on Friday when Dreiband sent a letter to Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti.

In the letter, Dreiband warned that Garcetti’s comments over an extended coronavirus-related shelter-at-home order could be “unlawful,” noting that the mayor’s plan appeared to be “arbitrary.”

A letter sent by DOJ attorney Eric Dreiband to Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti on Friday.

Dreiband’s letter, first reported by the Los Angeles Times, took aim at comments made by Barbara Ferrer, Los Angeles County’s top public health official, on a national morning news program. During the show, Ferrer said Los Angeles County would likely “never be completely open” until a vaccine or cure for the novel coronavirus COVID-19 was available.

Though Garcetti later clarified Ferrer’s comments, Dreiband said the Justice Department was “concerned about what may be an arbitrary and heavy-handed approach to continuing stay-at-home requirements.”

Garcetti has warned Los Angeles may remain partially closed for at least several months. As of Saturday, more than 2,000 deaths have been attributed to the-fast spreading novel coronavirus.

In March, businesses throughout California were closed following a statewide shelter-in-place order issued by Gov. Gavin Newsom. The governor’s plan followed several similar orders issued by a handful of California counties hit hardest by the virus.

Under the order, certain businesses deemed “essential” were allowed to remain open under modified conditions, including a requirement that these businesses employ social distancing practices. Grocery stores continued to operate, as did dine-in restaurants, though the latter was limited to delivery and pick-up orders.

Other non-essential businesses, including nail salons, barbershops and movie theaters were closed. Recreation areas including state parks and lakes were also closed.

For churches and other places of worship, the governor’s shelter-in-place order triggered a divergence from mass gatherings. While some churches offered services online by drive-through, others flaunted the governor’s order, with police intervening in some cases.

Other churches sued, saying the governor’s order infringed on their constitutional freedom to assemble and worship.

In mid-May, Newsom unveiled a four-step plan to reopen businesses and other operations throughout California. The state is currently allowing some counties to operate in the second phase of the plan, which re-opens dine-in restaurants and shopping malls who adopt more-rigorous “social distancing” guidelines.

But Phase 2 does not apply to churches, which continue to be closed throughout the state. Earlier this week, Dreiband sent a letter to Newsom and Xavier Becerra, the state’s attorney general, warning that the state’s categorization of churches as non-essential likely created an illegal double standard.

“Religious gatherings may not be singled out for unequal treatment compared to other non-religious gatherings that have the same effect on the government’s public health interest absent the most-compelling reasons,” Dreiband wrote.

Speaking to CBS13 News, civil litigator Mark Reichel said DOJ attorneys may have a case against state officials if they decide to pursue that issue in court.

“Until a federal judge says the churches have to open, the governor can still keep them close,” Mark said, adding that state officials aren’t required to respond to the letter until a lawsuit is brought.