The Winslow
07-26-2011, 04:26 PM
Source (http://lufkindailynews.com/news/local/article_79700610-b30b-11e0-a4e5-001cc4c03286.html)
TL;DR: version: Mentally-retarded Hispanic kicks open the door to his own home. Suspicious neighbor thinks it's a burglar and calls the police. The cops' arrival frightens the dimwit, who seeks shelter in his bathroom. Cops get him anyway, beat him up, and after finding out he's not a burglar but the owner of the place, charge him with resisting arrest. Since the guy doesn't speak English, the judge deems him not a victim and sentences him to one month of jail, adding that without the jury's demand for leniency, it would have been six months instead.
Justice is a beautiful thing. :grey:
A jury on Wednesday found a Lufkin man guilty of resisting arrest in his home after police mistook him for a burglar. A judge then sentenced the man to serve 30 days in jail and pay a $500 fine.
Marco Sauceda, 30, entered Angelina County Court-at-Law No. 2 Judge Derek Flournoy’s courtroom Wednesday morning wearing a tan button-down shirt and navy dress slacks, but by the end of the day found himself in county orange.
Following a one-day trial and four-hour deliberation, a six-person Angelina County jury concluded Sauceda was guilty of resisting arrest on March 15, 2009, while being pepper-sprayed, shot with a pepper ball gun and wrestled to the ground by Lufkin Police officers in his living room, according to testimony.
In closing arguments Wednesday morning, Sauceda’s defense attorney, Ryan Deaton, chronicled how his client was approached by Lufkin police when they entered his home at 111 Finley St. on a report of a black man kicking in the front door, called in by a neighbor. Sauceda, who Deaton described as having the mind of a child, then locked himself in the bathroom and refused to come out despite repeated warnings by the officers on scene.
“A person should feel secure in their own home. No matter black, white, Hispanic, Asian, I don’t care who they are, they should feel secure in their own home,” Deaton said. “The police have no right to come in your house and push you around and beat you up and do the things they did on March, 15, 2009.”
Deaton blamed a language barrier for Sauceda’s failure to respond to police, but prosecutor Gary Taylor attempted to diffuse that notion by comparing the similarities in the English word “police” and Spanish word “policia.”
“You have to look at it through the eyes of Marco Sauceda,” Deaton said. “He doesn’t think like you and I do. He has a child’s mind. He operates on a lower level thinking than you and I do. Number two, he doesn’t speak this language.”
In his closing arguments, Taylor reminded jurors that Sauceda’s behavior throughout the incident led police to believe he was a criminal.
“His behavior was more consistent with a burglar than an innocent person, and that’s what got us here today,” Taylor said. “If you’ve got a language barrier, you find somebody to help accommodate. Is it reasonable that you close the door and lock yourself in your room? I don’t know that it is.
“This whole incident could have been avoided very easily if he would have said, ‘Me llamo Marco. Es mi casa.’”
Before the verdict was delivered, a note from the jury was sent to Flournoy, which he said was “indicative of the verdict.” It read, “We’ve all reached a verdict. To us we feel he has been wronged. Please consider that in his sentencing.”
Neither side presented evidence in the sentencing phase of Sauceda’s Class A misdemeanor conviction. Flournoy asked Deaton for his suggestion in sentencing. Flournoy could have sentenced Saueceda to up to one year in jail and/or up to a $4,000 fine.
“It is our opinion he’s been punished enough, and I think the jury’s note says that,” Deaton said. “I think the pictures (of his injuries) show punishment in this case. I will respect any decision you make.”
Taking a few moments to collect his thoughts, Flournoy then addressed Sauceda directly. The dialogue of the trial was delivered in Spanish to Sauceda via translator Josefina Villanueva. Flournoy told Sauceda that because he did not take the stand in his own defense it was difficult for him to sympathize with his situation.
“I haven’t heard from you and I have no idea why you didn’t speak. That causes me some trouble. I don’t agree with the notion you are a victim in this case,” Flournoy said. “I think your actions put you and the officers in harm’s way. This could have been easily avoided.”
Had it not been for the jury’s note asking for leniency, Flournoy said he would have likely sentenced Sauceda to six months in jail.
Despite the unfavorable criminal outcome for his client, Deaton said he intends to pursue a federal civil lawsuit against the city on Sauceda’s behalf.
“The civil suit will more than likely take place in January or February of next year,” Deaton said. “I don’t know if this will impact the civil suit, but based on the jury’s feelings that he was wronged, I don’t think it will.”
When asked if the possibility of a civil suit was the motivation behind trying the case, County Attorney Ed Jones said the case would have been tried either way.
“We tried the case simply because we really did believe he resisted arrest,” Jones said. “The statute says that you do not have the right to resist the arrest. We were going to try the case no matter what.”
Following sentencing, Sauceda was immediately taken to the Angelina County Jail to begin serving his sentence.
TL;DR: version: Mentally-retarded Hispanic kicks open the door to his own home. Suspicious neighbor thinks it's a burglar and calls the police. The cops' arrival frightens the dimwit, who seeks shelter in his bathroom. Cops get him anyway, beat him up, and after finding out he's not a burglar but the owner of the place, charge him with resisting arrest. Since the guy doesn't speak English, the judge deems him not a victim and sentences him to one month of jail, adding that without the jury's demand for leniency, it would have been six months instead.
Justice is a beautiful thing. :grey:
A jury on Wednesday found a Lufkin man guilty of resisting arrest in his home after police mistook him for a burglar. A judge then sentenced the man to serve 30 days in jail and pay a $500 fine.
Marco Sauceda, 30, entered Angelina County Court-at-Law No. 2 Judge Derek Flournoy’s courtroom Wednesday morning wearing a tan button-down shirt and navy dress slacks, but by the end of the day found himself in county orange.
Following a one-day trial and four-hour deliberation, a six-person Angelina County jury concluded Sauceda was guilty of resisting arrest on March 15, 2009, while being pepper-sprayed, shot with a pepper ball gun and wrestled to the ground by Lufkin Police officers in his living room, according to testimony.
In closing arguments Wednesday morning, Sauceda’s defense attorney, Ryan Deaton, chronicled how his client was approached by Lufkin police when they entered his home at 111 Finley St. on a report of a black man kicking in the front door, called in by a neighbor. Sauceda, who Deaton described as having the mind of a child, then locked himself in the bathroom and refused to come out despite repeated warnings by the officers on scene.
“A person should feel secure in their own home. No matter black, white, Hispanic, Asian, I don’t care who they are, they should feel secure in their own home,” Deaton said. “The police have no right to come in your house and push you around and beat you up and do the things they did on March, 15, 2009.”
Deaton blamed a language barrier for Sauceda’s failure to respond to police, but prosecutor Gary Taylor attempted to diffuse that notion by comparing the similarities in the English word “police” and Spanish word “policia.”
“You have to look at it through the eyes of Marco Sauceda,” Deaton said. “He doesn’t think like you and I do. He has a child’s mind. He operates on a lower level thinking than you and I do. Number two, he doesn’t speak this language.”
In his closing arguments, Taylor reminded jurors that Sauceda’s behavior throughout the incident led police to believe he was a criminal.
“His behavior was more consistent with a burglar than an innocent person, and that’s what got us here today,” Taylor said. “If you’ve got a language barrier, you find somebody to help accommodate. Is it reasonable that you close the door and lock yourself in your room? I don’t know that it is.
“This whole incident could have been avoided very easily if he would have said, ‘Me llamo Marco. Es mi casa.’”
Before the verdict was delivered, a note from the jury was sent to Flournoy, which he said was “indicative of the verdict.” It read, “We’ve all reached a verdict. To us we feel he has been wronged. Please consider that in his sentencing.”
Neither side presented evidence in the sentencing phase of Sauceda’s Class A misdemeanor conviction. Flournoy asked Deaton for his suggestion in sentencing. Flournoy could have sentenced Saueceda to up to one year in jail and/or up to a $4,000 fine.
“It is our opinion he’s been punished enough, and I think the jury’s note says that,” Deaton said. “I think the pictures (of his injuries) show punishment in this case. I will respect any decision you make.”
Taking a few moments to collect his thoughts, Flournoy then addressed Sauceda directly. The dialogue of the trial was delivered in Spanish to Sauceda via translator Josefina Villanueva. Flournoy told Sauceda that because he did not take the stand in his own defense it was difficult for him to sympathize with his situation.
“I haven’t heard from you and I have no idea why you didn’t speak. That causes me some trouble. I don’t agree with the notion you are a victim in this case,” Flournoy said. “I think your actions put you and the officers in harm’s way. This could have been easily avoided.”
Had it not been for the jury’s note asking for leniency, Flournoy said he would have likely sentenced Sauceda to six months in jail.
Despite the unfavorable criminal outcome for his client, Deaton said he intends to pursue a federal civil lawsuit against the city on Sauceda’s behalf.
“The civil suit will more than likely take place in January or February of next year,” Deaton said. “I don’t know if this will impact the civil suit, but based on the jury’s feelings that he was wronged, I don’t think it will.”
When asked if the possibility of a civil suit was the motivation behind trying the case, County Attorney Ed Jones said the case would have been tried either way.
“We tried the case simply because we really did believe he resisted arrest,” Jones said. “The statute says that you do not have the right to resist the arrest. We were going to try the case no matter what.”
Following sentencing, Sauceda was immediately taken to the Angelina County Jail to begin serving his sentence.