Powerful Message During Closing Arguments in Multi-Defendant Gang Case

by Antoinnette Borbon

As the morning began, all four defense attorneys asked Judge Rosenberg to consider an [Penal Code section] 1118 motion to dismiss charges against the four young men accused of second degree robbery and assault on a Woodland man.

The prosecutor had added a gang enhancement to two of the counts against all four young men. But, despite an exhaustive effort by Attorney Jeff Raven, the motion was denied. Judge Rosenberg felt there was sufficient evidence to allow a jury to decide on the charges, and ruled against the 1118 motion.

So the state began its case. DDA Robin Johnson started by saying to the jurors, “Do you remember in my opening I told you this was going to be a difficult case? Difficult because of the witnesses and their saying one thing to police, and another on the stand.” She said, “Let’s start with the facts. It began at the 7-Eleven.”

She stated, “You see on the video three men walking into the store, and you see Nichols and Beatty.

She said you could see the items purchased on the video and that the court heard testimony from Detective Nay, who testified about the clerk’s statement given two weeks after the incident.

Detective Nay said the clerk told him about one of the males asking Nichols who he was, and Nichols responding with, “Who the f—- are you?” Nay said the clerk told him he thought something was going to happen.

Robin Johnson stated it was then that outside there was an exchange of words. She said it was something to the effect of, “Do you bang?” She stated it was also heard by Beatty, Nichols girlfriend, that one of the men called Nichols a scrap southerner.

Ms. Johnson went on to state that the fight between the men began in the parking lot of the 7-Eleven and ended up across the street, where Beatty told cops she banged on the door of the Taco Bell for help.

Ms. Johnson said during the fight Nichols dropped his bike and groceries. She stated one of the young men took the groceries and bike and rode off. After the fight ended, the four fled and were found in two separate locations. She said Juan Fuentes was identified by both Nichols and Deatty, having a ponytail, tattoos, and wearing a large necklace.

Ms. Johnson went on to talk about the law on robbery and assault. She quoted Nichols’ statement about not wanting to be a snitch, and reminded jurors about Nichols being beaten up eight times since the incident. She said gangs use fear and intimidation.

Ms. Johnson stated the evidence provided showed pretty much all the same. Perez testified to the primary activities of criminal street gangs. She stated he went through the activities/functions of a gang like the Norteños. She says, “You could look at the statements of witnesses for yourself, a transcript is there.”

Keith Staten, attorney for Justin Gonzalez, began his closing argument first. He began with, “When you fish with a net, you catch things you didn’t mean to catch.” He says I told you to use your common sense, but it means you have to follow the law.

Mr. Staten said Mr. Gonzalez is not guilty. He said no credible identification or description was given of the young males. He said if you check the video, and check the receipts, no Cheetos were sold. He stated that Cheetos is a key part of this case.

Mr. Staten said there were no recorded statements. He stated law officers could have pushed “record,” but he never did. He stated Nichols knew his attacker, who had several tattoos on the head and neck and wore a white shirt. Justin wore a black shirt.

Mr. Staten said, “What is a reasonable doubt?” He stated that having an “abiding conviction” means you will not have doubts. He said your state of mind after the verdict should be sure. Even Nichols contradicts Beatty’s statements.

Nichols did know whom he confronted and who confronted him. DDA Johnson didn’t explain that the Cheetos is the link. Mr. Staten said that there is nothing done to be sure they didn’t ensnare the wrong people. Nichols is a brave guy. He said that the jurors saw how Nichols changed when he saw the report written by Officer Lara. He told the jurors that it’s a lie. He said on the stand he did not know who jumped him eight times, but what did he keep saying? “I can’t put innocent people away.” Mr. Staten said the process the cops use is built to fail, it’s not competent, and it is completely reasonable to get the wrong people forced to stick to their story. He stated reasonable doubt exists.

Mr. Staten said where do the Cheetos come from? And why weren’t the Cheetos and the Pepsi found on Gonzalez or Ozuna, brought into evident and fingerprinted for DNA? He went on to talk about the law and stated the elements of the crimes are not met.

Mr. Staten summed it up by saying “I don’t have to prove anything by reasonable doubt, but I can bring up Mr. Roa. Staten said you need more than inaccurate and inconsistent statements. Don’t let sympathy or bias come in. Not guilty doesn’t mean justice is not served. He said we have arrived, the plane is here.

Next up was Attorney Bob Spangler. Spangler started out thanking the jurors for their time throughout this trial. He said that he agrees, there was sloppy investigation, no logic. He stated Fuentes, his client, hid and watched the arrest around the corner.

He stated Fuentes was not found with food or a bike. We know three individuals walked into the store, then we know, after a few minutes, we see the three back into the store. Now, you have arguments on who said what? But they did take notes, but they destroyed them.

There is essential disparity between officers’ and each witness’ testimony. He said Nichols was livid: “I did not say those things, that is a lie.” One curious statement said by Beattty that before the fight, she stated, they were going to take the bike. But later she denied it on the stand. Spangler said the identifications made by the two victims were appalling. “Nothing reliable about the line up.”

Mr. Spangler said that he knows this because Nichols identified Roa – and he wasn’t even there. You don’t have a robbery, and this goes back to the shoddy investigation. He stated there was a blonde woman inside the store to whom the cops never went for a statement. Spangler stated, “Who better to see who took the bike or the assault?” There are more people involved than the cops picked up.

Spangler said “You need to use logic. Question every piece of evidence! The video clearly shows a guy with a pony tail and knee socks. Fuentes had on different socks, ankle socks, not knee socks. How do you explain this?” He said the man in the video has more hair than Fuentes.

Spangler said, “can anyone know the intents of a 19-year-old male?” He stated, “There is insufficient evidence for guilt. But he may be guilty of resisting.”

Ava Landers began her closing with a thank you to the jurors also. She stated, “I want to talk about another dolphin in the net. Ms. Landers said, “There is no evidence of DNA, no evidence of items, no Pepsi bottle? Right, there you have doubt.” She said, “You heard Beatty say Nichols was jealous, aggressive with a bad temper.” She stated, “Ozuna and Gonzalez were found walking leisurely down a community lane. Officer Wright stopped them because they were young and Hispanic.”

Landers went on to say, “Lets talk about identifying.” She said Beatty assumed they were the guys who assaulted Nichols because that is what the cops told her that night. She said Officer Lara asked only a couple questions, and then took the two to do an identification through a lineup where they may not have even been able to see. She stated, “Nichols and Beatty both were told they couldn’t identify them because they were caught up in the fight.” Landers pointed out, “Even the clerk told the officer he was too far away to see.” She says no officer took a statement that night from either the clerk or the blonde woman in the 7-Eleven.

She said the clerk was adamant he did not say to police what they wrote in their report. She said there are many unanswered questions in this case. She said most officers were put on the stand to impeach the states’ own witnesses. Landers said Ozuna has no criminal record, no gang tattoos and no evidence he is a member.

She summed it up by saying, “Perez himself admitted if you wear red, you may get stopped. I ask you to come to the conclusion he is not guilty, you will have questions and questions lead to doubt. Thank you!”

Last to give a closing was attorney Jeff Raven. Raven represented Jose Jimenez.

Raven began with, “Lladies and gentlemen, thank you for being here.” He stated fiercely, “The evidence is absolutely lacking on all these defendants!” He stated we were all sympathetic to Nichols being beat up eight times and that he too wants to see the people responsible caught. He said, “But we shouldn’t de-humanize these defendants. But let me go through it more methodically.”

Raven said, “The picture of Nichols shows virtually no injury.” He said you can see Nichols sweating from being under the influence of meth. Raven showed the jurors the time on the video and pointed out the whole thing lasted approximately seven minutes, pointing out that exchange of words, the fight and afterwards, also seeing both Fuentes and Jimenez walk back inside the 7-Eleven.

He said, “Det. Nay’s testimony is critical because he stated the clerk told him he thought something was going to happen but, in fact, the men were smiling on the video and seen being friendly with the clerk.”

Raven said Mr. Roa was stripped down to his boxers by police, and he had nothing to do with this. He said to look at the video and you will see the blonde woman go outside, turning to look at the fight, and then turning back around within minutes. He said no one contacted her to take a statement.

Raven pointed out how we can hear or see something and forget certain statements or quotes made by people, as we are only human. He said, “The DDA wants you to disregard sworn statements but you need to view these with extreme caution, the ones given but not recorded.” He asserted Nichols gave no details on the scene.

He stated it is “interesting how they photograph my clients hands, looking for gang related tattoos, but were not looking for exculpatory evidence.” Raven asked his client to stand up and show the jurors his hands, showing the tattoos. He stated, “My client’s actions that night are not consistent with the evidence.”

Raven asked the jurors to use their common sense and do not believe what the DDA says . “My client was not there for the argument with Nichols.”

He told the jury, “The first thing you must do is disregard the robbery, robbery has to show intent to deprive.” He said, “My client goes running over to see the fight and comes back in the store shrugging his shoulders as if to say, ‘I don’t know what happened?’ And you know this by the blonde woman turning back around in the video.”

“I feel like I’m beating a dead horse here but, it bares repeating, out of the goodness of my heart, I want the people responsible for the beating up of Nichols but we have to use reason not emotion.” Raven, fighting back emotion, stated emphatically, “There are a couple of people involved in this case who are not in this room, you have to find my client not guilty and, in fact, none of these defendants guilty!” “Thank you,” he said and sat down.

DDA Johnson addressed the four attorneys’ statements. She said in her final, “I’m not going to stand up here and yell for 45 minutes, I’m just going to tell you to read over the transcript.” She said “Ms. Landers wants you to disregard Perez’s testimony about the fear of gangs but you can read for yourself what Nichols and Beatty said.” She states Beatty did identify three of the men. But then changed her story on the stand. She said that Mr. Raven says “not a robbery,” but look at the instructions. It is a robbery if, while he is being beaten up, they take his bike. “Why would the cops lie?” she asked, and why did Nichols lie? She said to remember Nichols said,”I’m not going to identify them. He didn’t say I cannot identify them.”

She asked the jury to go over the evidence, and that this case is not about a bag of Cheetos. She said, “Llook at the video, these men acted like they owned the place while in the store and that’s what Norteños do.”

DDA Johnson said, “Ladies and gentlemen, look at all the evidence and make a decision.”

Jurors began deliberation Wednesday morning.