Page 1
Legality of Resentencing in Chambers Draws Challenge
Former District Attorney Cooley, Victims’ Rights Advocate Cady File Document on Behalf of Slain Man’s Family
Arguing That New Statute’s Provision for Resentencing-by-Stipulation Contravenes State Constitution
By a MetNews Staff Writer
Former Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley and victims’ rights attorney Kathleen Cady yesterday filed in the Los Angeles Superior Court a document labeled “Victim’s Notice of Appearance and Assertion of Rights” in which it was contended that state constitutional rights of the family of a man who was slain on Jan. 23, 1992, would be trammeled if the murderer were resentenced without a public hearing, and one at which they could speak.
The murderer, Scott Forrest Collins, was sentenced to death and that sentence was upheld by the California Supreme Court, in a unanimous opinion, on May 27, 2010. The Office of District Attorney George Gascón wants Los Angeles Superior Court Judge William C. Ryan to resentence Collins to life in prison without possibility of parole, and to do so in an in-chambers order.
“I absolutely want to be heard on this important issue,” Bob Baker, step-father of the victim, said in a declaration attached to yesterday’s notice and memorandum of points and authorities.
Baker was longtime president of the Los Angeles Police Protective League and was law enforcement liaison for Cooley, while he was district attorney, and for Cooley’s successor, Jackie Lacey.
The declarant said:
“My step-son was Fred Rose. Mr. Rose was robbed and murdered by the defendant in 1992. I am opposed to my step-son’s murderer being re-sentenced. I request my right to be present and be heard at any re-sentencing.”
Rose’s daughter, Heather Scott, likewise said in a declaration that she is “adamantly opposed to my father’s murderer being resentenced” and requested her “right to be present and be heard at any resentencing.”
Penal Code §1170.03
Gascón’s office is proceeding under Penal Code §1170.03, enacted last year. It authorizes a court, on the recommendation of the district attorney (or attorney general or prison authorities), to “recall the sentence and commitment previously ordered and resentence the defendant in the same manner as if” he or she “had not previously been sentenced.”
It specifies:
“Resentencing may be granted without a hearing upon stipulation by the parties.”
Such a stipulation was executed on Tuesday by Deputy District Attorney Shelan Y. Joseph, on behalf of the People, and Deputy Public Defender K. Elizabeth Dahlstrom, who is representing Collins, and filed with the court that day.
State Constitution
Cooley and Cady pointed to Art. I, §28(b) of the state Constitution which enumerates rights of victims, one of which is “[t]o be heard, upon request, at any proceeding…involving a…sentencing….”
Sec. 28(e) specifies a “victim” includes “a lawful representative of a crime victim who is deceased,” and §28(c) provides that “a lawful representative of the victim…may enforce the rights enumerated in subdivision (b) in any trial or appellate court with jurisdiction over the case as a matter of right.”
The lawyers for Rose’s daughter and step father asserted:
“The District Attorney’s Office should not be allowed recommend resentencing and ask the court accept a stipulation that the resentencing occur without a hearing and deprive the victims of their right lo be heard at sentencing.”
‘Lateral Transfer’
Shelan was brought over to the District Attorney’s Office by Gascón from the Public Defender’s Office through a “lateral transfer,” without her taking the exam or undergoing the training generally required of new prosecutors. The legality of that hiring and others by Gascón is being challenged in a writ action brought by the Association of Deputy District Attorneys (“ADDA”).
The document filed yesterday declares:
“The criminal justice system is designed to be an adversary system requiring a prosecutor and a defense attorney. The system does not work if there are two defense attorneys and no prosecutor. Victims arc dependent on officials to properly and ethically perform their duties. Victims have a right to expect elected officials act in good faith and follow the oath they took to support and defend the constitution.”
Gascón’s Policy
It adds:
“Any objective review of the case and procedural history would lead one to come to the conclusion that the People’s Recommendation for Resentencing is a result of Gascon’s policy that ‘A sentence of death is never an appropriate resolution in any case’ and working backwards to have the ends justify the means. When the evidence suggests that the District Attorney’s Office and the defense are in collusion, the court is the final and only gate keeper to ensure that justice is done and victims” rights are upheld.”
Ryan is the Superior Court’s re-sentencing expert. He is rarely reversed.
Meanwhile, voting began yesterday by members of the ADDA on whether to endorse the movement to recall Gascón. Balloting will end Feb. 24.
Copyright 2022, Metropolitan News Company