DA Argues Against Release of Man Who Was Overcharged to Begin With
The media has been all over the case of Jeffrey Lemus who was found guilty last year of voluntary manslaughter in the death of Kelly Choate at Kenny’s Bar & Grill in Woodland.
Mr. Lemus has served just a year of his sentence, but Mr. Lemus was diagnosed with a terminal illness and given less than six months to live. Under compassionate release, inmates can be released from prison if they are diagnosed with a terminal illness, have less than six months to live and are under 24-hour medical care.
The hearing scheduled for Monday was put off until Thursday when Judge David W. Reed, who presided over the trial, will be available to make the decision.
The family of Kelly Choate is fighting the release, arguing that he should spend his final days behind bars. The daughter of Mr. Choate told KCRA, “I was always a forgiving person, but this is just something that I don’t think I’ll ever forgive.”
Meanwhile, DA Jeff Reisig believes that, even on his death bed, Mr. Lemus is a danger to the community.
“Mr. Lemus killed a man in the middle of a bar with a very large knife, and in our opinion, he still poses a great risk to this community,” Mr. Reisig told a local news station.
What the media is not telling you is that the case of Jeffrey Lemus was once again an overcharged one from the start. Mr. Lemus was originally charged with first degree murder and acquitted of both first and second degree murder before the jury agreed to voluntary manslaughter, which split the difference between the DA charging first degree murder and the defense, led by Public Defender Ron Johnson, claiming self-defense.
The DA in this case had argued that, after seeing Mr. Choate at Kenny’s Bar & Grill, Mr. Lemus attempted to bait Mr. Choate into the bathroom and when that didn’t work, Mr. Lemus lured Mr. 
Choate to the bar entrance, where he stabbed the victim.
But the defense argued it was self-defense after Mr. Choate had publicly humiliated and threatened Mr. Lemus. The two had a long-standing feud punctuated over the years by various incidents and confrontations. The defense pointed out at one point the two had a confrontation at the bar where Mr. Choate punched Mr. Lemus in the face.
Mr. Choate, the defense claimed, was known to have a knife that he used when he went fishing, but he didn’t just use the knife on fish. There were numerous documented incidents in which Mr. Choate had used the knife to threaten others.
They argued that Mr. Lemus believed his life to be in danger, and that if he didn’t kill Mr. Choate, Mr. Choate would kill him. This was backed by an eyewitness who heard Mr. Choate threaten that he was going to kill Lemus.
The jury, however, did not go to self-defense, finding that, while the act was not premeditated or even intentional murder, the defendant was guilty of manslaughter. He faced up to 11 years and received a seven-year sentence.
From the prosecution’s standpoint, Mr. Choate was confronted by the defendant in the restroom, but Mr. Choate walked away.
However, Mr. Lemus, the prosecution claimed, couldn’t stop himself. After remaining in the restroom for 12 minutes, pacing back and forth and planning what to do next, Lemus walked out of the restroom and charged Choate. Mr. Lemus pulled out his 18-inch knife – or sword, as the prosecutor called it – and stabbed Mr. Choate right in the heart.
The prosecution claimed he just stared at Mr. Choate, showing no remorse and walked out of the bar. Later when he found out that Kelly Choate had died, the defendant cried, but only as a matter of self-defense, not actual remorse.
Where will Judge Reed come down on the matter? Mr. Lemus does not have a history of mental illness and had only a record of misdemeanors prior to this case. The judge at sentencing noted that the defendant had “great provocation and was a willing participant.” At the time he rejected a plea by the defense for probation and sentenced him to the recommended six years for the middle base term for manslaughter, plus one year for the use of a deadly weapon.
The DA is arguing that Mr. Lemus is a danger to the community, but ignores his lack of violent criminal history outside of his feud with Mr. Choate.
From our standpoint, the jury got this one a lot closer to right than the DA did from the start. Even during the sentencing, the prosecution continued to make the same arguments that seemed to be rejected by the jury – that Mr. Lemus had attempted to bait Mr. Choate, had a plan to hurt him, and attempted to lie in wait.
So now the state can force Mr. Lemus to die behind bars or Judge Reed can allow him to live out his last few months at home, no longer at the state’s expense. Is he really a threat to the community?
Compassionate release seems to have been designed for cases like this, which saves money because the individual leaves the prison system, and is no longer under the medical care of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitaion.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Have no problem with the compassionate release as long as he never touches a knife or other weapon again… begs the question… what happens if he is still alive after a year?
Well, he’s under no obligation to die in 6 months or a year. My understanding is that if his condition improves and he is determined to pose a threat to public safety, the Board of Parole Hearings may revoke his parole and return him to prison.