Including drug offenders arrested with small amounts or for other crimes such as shoplifting, petty theft, disorderly conduct   

To “divert low-level recreational users out of the criminal justice system and into health care system”

“Reducing strain in the courts” at presiding judge’s request

By Scott Alonso, Public Information Officer, Office of the District Attorney, Contra Costa County

Contra Costa County District Attorney Diana Becton announced last week, misdemeanor filing considerations for the DA’s Office regarding . Originally initiated as a pilot, the considerations are now formal policy for the Office. The DA’s Office will no longer file charges against most people arrested or cited solely for the possession of small amounts of drugs. The idea is to divert low-level recreational users out of the criminal justice system and into the health care system with the goals of both reducing the strain in the courts and on law enforcement, and also by providing treatment options for the user.

Last year District Attorney Becton and Public Defender Robin Lipetzky were contacted by the presiding judge of the court who stressed the need to reduce the significant backlog of low-level, non-violent misdemeanors in the court system. The backlog of cases was slowing down court operations and proving to be an immense burden on the budgets of various law enforcement agencies and the courts.

Furthermore, there have been significant changes in the laws governing personal drug use that have changed the dynamics of prosecuting low-level drug cases. The aim of these considerations is to stop chronic patterns of arrest and to connect individuals to community based behavioral health services. For a first-time offender we will refer the person to health care services in our community. The policy allows the DA’s Office to focus our efforts on cases that may pose significant public safety concerns such as criminal street gangs, drug dealers, violent criminals, and cases involving firearms.

“When I took Office, I realized we had to change our perspective on filing cases, especially low-level drug cases. From my experience as a judge I saw first-hand how individuals were cycling through our system. Now as the District Attorney, I worked with several law enforcement partners throughout the county to build a plan and gain consensus on how best to proceed with these types of cases. We cannot prosecute ourselves out of this growing trend of low-level offenses being submitted to our Office for a filing decision,” said DA Becton.

Prosecutors will use their discretion on these low-level non-violent offenses to determine if criminal charges are appropriate. Pre-filing diversion is also available for individuals in lieu of a formal criminal complaint.

DA Becton stated, “As I do with all of my Office’s policies, I will periodically review this policy and work with my justice system colleagues to ensure its effectiveness and to modify it when necessary.”

In several situations, the policy may not apply. The exceptions include: the person has been arrested on three previous occasions in the past year for a misdemeanor drug offense, the theft is more than $300 in value, or the subject is on probation.

Misdemeanor Filing Considerations

FIRST-TIME AND STAND-ALONE OFFENSES

For the offenses below, do not file a case predicated upon these statutes if the individual is a first-time offender or this is a stand-alone charge. Consider use of CAPS, Infracting, or a Probation Violation as appropriate.

If an individual becomes a repeat offender, review all cases to include any previously unfiled incidents.

Note: For any of the below offenses, these considerations do not apply if:

• There are multiple violations (2 or more within a 12-month period)
• Theft cases: amount of stolen items is $300 or more
• Defendant is currently on probation
• Low net weight cases of controlled substances will generally not be filed unless there are three or more misdemeanor drug offenses or another qualifying exception within a 12-month period

The misdemeanor charges these considerations encompass are as follows:

STATUTE                 NAME OF STATUTE

BP 4060                      Possession of Controlled Substance

BP 4140                      Possession of Hypodermic or Syringe

HS 11357                    Possession of Marijuana

HS 11364                    Possession of Drug Paraphernalia

HS 11350                    Possession of Controlled Substance

HS 11377                    Possession of Controlled Substance

HS 11550                    Under the Influence of Controlled Substance

PC 415                        Disturbing the Peace

PC 459.5                     Shoplifting

PC 466                        Possession of Burglar Tools

PC 484                        Petty Theft

PC 602                         Trespass

PC 647(f)                    Disorderly Conduct

PROBATION VIOLATIONS

If an individual is already on Probation, consider electing to file a Probation Violation in Lieu of a new docket. Consult with your supervising DDA as appropriate.

SUSPENDED LICENSES

Infract the below vehicle code offenses. Note: this does not apply to VC 14601.2 and VC 14601.5 offenses.

STATUTE                 NAME OF STATUTE                                              ACTION

VC 12500                    Unlicensed Driver                                                       INFRACT

VC 14601.1                 Non-DUI Suspended or Revoked License                  INFRACT

Result of years-long Operation by FBI Safe Streets Task Force

By Scott Alonso, Public Information Officer, Contra Costa County District Attorney

Martinez, Calif. – Today, Tuesday, September 15, 2020 the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office is announcing three homicide cold cases, involving multiple defendants who are gang members affiliated with the Sureños, were filed recently. The gang violence was focused in South Concord and near Monument Boulevard. This successful effort was due to the years-long investigation and operation led by the FBI Safe Streets Task Force and local partners, including Concord Police, FBI, U.S. Attorney’s Office of Northern California, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms along with our Office. Two cases were filed last week, and one was filed yesterday, totaling four homicides involving 11 defendants. (See related article)

One of the homicides occurred in Antioch, and the victim was from Pittsburg, (See related article). The other three of the homicides occurred in Concord.

Operation Boulevard Blues culminated in a major law enforcement operation last Thursday that resulted in the arrest of 31 individuals and involved 31 different law enforcement agencies. Thirty-four search warrants were executed in multiple locations across Contra Costa County and 42 firearms were recovered. The details of the operation were announced earlier this morning with our federal partners.

“Our local efforts working collaboratively with our law enforcement partners, especially Concord Police, will keep our community safer and take violent gang members off the streets of Concord,” said District Attorney Diana Becton. “This successful operation started with a wiretap and led to multiple gang members involved in senseless murders and violence being arrested. While these cases were not solved right away, Concord Police and the FBI Safe Streets Task Force did not give up and fortunately we can bring some closure to the victims’ families.”

Overall, the DA’s Office filed three separate homicide complaints involving the following gang members of the Sureños – all of the alleged four homicides were done for the benefit of the gang:

• People v. Michael Valdez, Andrew Cervantes, Daniel Rodriguez, Docket Number 01-194377-8

o   Victim is Marcos Villazon of Pittsburg, Date of Alleged Murder is November 21, 2015 in Antioch

o   Victim is Luis Estrada, Date of Alleged Murder is November 30, 2015 in Concord

• People v. Rafael Lopez & Juan Barocio Jr., Docket Number 01-194379-4

o   Victim is Victor Gutierrez, Date of Alleged Murder is April 17, 2014 in Concord

• People v. Jose Cisneros, Marcos Ochoa, Luis Cruz, Aurelia Mendez, Antonio Mendez, Jose Ochoa, Docket Number 01-194418-0

o   Victim is Erick Cruz, Date of Alleged Murder is September 12, 2015 in Concord

The criminal investigations because of this operation are still active and ongoing. All of the defendants charged by the DA’s Office remain in custody.

Allen Payton contributed to this report.

Violated state environmental protection laws

By Scott Alonso, Public Information Officer, Contra Costa County District Attorney

Martinez, Calif. – Contra Costa County District Attorney Diana Becton announced Monday, a $1.43 million settlement against Kelly-Moore Paint Company (Kelly-Moore) to resolve allegations that the company violated California state laws governing hazardous waste by routinely and illegally disposing of paint colorants, paint, electronic devices, aerosol products, and other hazardous wastes into company waste bins destined for municipal landfills not authorized to accept hazardous waste. The lawsuit also resolves allegations that Kelly-Moore failed to shred customer records containing confidential information before disposal.

“My office will always strive to protect the environment and public health by holding companies accountable for violating our environmental laws. This settlement not only acts as a deterrent against other potential violators but more importantly contains injunctive provisions to ensure Kelly Moore will maintain environmental compliance into the foreseeable future.,” stated Contra Costa County District Attorney Diana Becton.

Kelly-Moore is a retail paint company in North America. In California the company owns or operates approximately 106 retail stores, including nine stores in Contra Costa County as part of this settlement.

The investigation of Kelly-Moore was initiated by the California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC). From March 2016 through December 2018, inspectors from the DTSC, and investigators from other district attorney offices statewide, conducted a series of undercover inspections of waste bins originating at 29 separate Kelly-Moore locations. These inspections found numerous instances of unlawful disposal of hazardous waste paint colorants, paint, electronic devices, aerosol products, and other hazardous wastes. Kelly-Moore also violated laws meant to protect vulnerable confidential consumer information by unlawfully disposing of customer records without having rendered personal information unreadable.

When Kelly-Moore officials were notified by the prosecutors of the unlawful disposals, they immediately agreed to cooperate with the People and promptly implemented measures and dedicated additional resources towards environmental compliance at its stores. Stores are required to properly manage hazardous waste and to retain their waste in segregated, labeled containers to minimize the risk of exposure to employees and customers and to ensure that incompatible wastes do not combine to cause dangerous chemical reactions. Hazardous waste produced by Kelly-Moore stores through damage, spills, and returns is being collected by state-registered haulers, taken to proper disposal facilities, and properly documented and accounted for.

The settlement requires a monetary payment of $1.43 million. This consists of $825,000 for civil penalties, $178,750 for supplemental environmental projects, and $425,000 for reimbursement of investigative and enforcement costs. Kelly-Moore gets a credit of $125,000 against the penalties if it undertakes at least $250,000 in environmental enhancement work not required by law. In addition, the settlement includes provisions requiring Kelly-Moore to employ a California-based compliance employee to oversee Kelly-Moore’s hazardous waste compliance program and to undergo a trash receptacle audit to ensure hazardous wastes and confidential consumer information is properly disposed of at all stores. The results of the audit must be shared with the public. The company must also comply with 28 injunctive requirements pertaining to environmental and confidential consumer information protection laws.

Joining District Attorney Becton in this lawsuit are the District Attorneys of Alameda, Monterey, Placer, San Francisco, San Joaquin, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Sonoma and Yolo Counties.

Antioch Mayor Wright “disturbed” by and doesn’t “agree with this approach”; 3 arrested for theft of $20,000 of alcohol in San Pablo not charged as looting; more cases affected by policy

By Allen Payton

Contra Costa County District Attorney Diana Becton issued a policy in June, that recently went public, requiring her Deputy DA’s assess the reason someone was looting during a state of emergency before filing charges against them. However, the policy doesn’t prevent police officers from arresting the looter, according to DA’s office spokesman, Scott Alonso. CCDA Looting Guidelines

In the document obtained by Red State News, and shared with the Herald today, reads:

“Theft Offenses Committed During State of Emergency (PC 463)

In order to promote consistent and equitable filing practices the following analysis is to be applied when giving consideration to filing of PC 463 (Looting):

1. Was this theft offense substantially motivated by the state of emergency, or simply a theft offense which occurred contemporaneous to the declared state of emergency?

a. Factors to consider in making this determination:

i. Was the target business open or closed to the public during the state of emergency?
ii. What was the manner and means by which the suspect gained entry to the business?

iii. What was the nature/quantity/value of the goods targeted?

iv. Was the theft committed for financial gain or personal need?

v. Is there an articulable reason why another statute wouldn’t adequately address the particular incident?”

“I am not sure how they obtained the policy. But it is our policy,” Alonso confirmed. The policy is true but the article in Red State is highly misleading and frankly wrong.”

He then shared a link to an analysis of the policy and articles about it by Red State and other publications on the Snopes website devoted to fact checking, which has some of it’s own controversial history in getting things wrong, at times.

Alonso then clarified matters by writing, “Nothing in the guidelines prohibits the police from arresting someone for a crime. It is really important to underscore these guidelines are because of the COVID-19 shelter in place given Governor Newsom’s statewide order to declare a state of emergency. We look at if the theft is because there is a state of emergency – or is this simply an offense contemporaneous to the state of emergency. We wanted to ensure consistency across the Office in considering any criminal charges for alleged violations of PC 463. Historically, prior to COVID-19 – we could find no recent evidence that our Office had filed looting charges during a state of emergency.”

“As you know, when evaluating any criminal case our prosecutors look at the circumstances surrounding the incident,” he continued. “These guidelines are consistent with how we evaluate criminal cases. The policy does not say we won’t file these types of cases. The Red State article is incredibly misleading and frankly written from a slanted point of view. The author of the piece did not reach out to us prior to publication. I appreciate you reaching out in advance of publishing anything.”

Section 463 of the California Penal Code states that a person convicted of second-degree burglary or grand theft during a state of emergency is guilty of the crime of looting, which can be punishable by imprisonment in county jail for one year. However, alternative sentencing for someone on probation can be issued for 180 days in jail and 240 hours of community service. The crime of petty theft during a state of emergency is increased to a misdemeanor punishable by six months in county jail or 90 days in jail and 80 hours of community service.

Mayor Wright Responds

In an email sent from his re-election campaign account on Monday, Antioch Mayor Sean Wright wrote to Antioch residents with the subject line, “Unbelievable what our District Attorney just did.”

“I am disturbed by our Contra Costa County District Attorney’s announcement that our police officers must consider if looters ‘needed’ stolen property before they can charge them with looting,” he wrote. “Our DA is the first and only DA in the nation urging this kind of guidance.”

“Looting that takes place in times of emergency, such as we are going through, is against the law,” Wright continued. “According to our DA, if the looters ‘need’ an item in a retail shop, for example, it is OK for them to take that item without being charged. I don’t agree with this approach – do you? Please feel free to share your thoughts on this by clicking here to send me an email.”

He then provided a link to an article about the matter on The Daily Wire.

3 Arrested for $20,000 Theft of Alcohol Not Charged With Looting

One of the cases already affected by the policy includes three people arrested during the COVID-19 pandemic for stealing $20,000 from a beverage store in San Pablo but not charged with looting. Another case involved a woman attempting to break into an ATM during the pandemic, who was also not charged with looting.

The Contra Costa Deputy Sheriffs Association and police officers’ associations in the county are expected to issue a response to the policy, soon.

“…change needed to upend a system rooted in slavery.” – District Attorney Diana Becton

By Allen Payton

In a joint commentary published on Politico.com last week, Contra Costa County District Attorney Diana Becton and four other district attorneys from across the country issued a statement on 11 criminal justice reform commitments. However, the commentary states they want to transform, not reform the system. The commentary was not sent to local media which cover Contra Costa County.

One of the points reiterates what Becton promoted in June, with other prosecutors in California, which is to ban political contributions from police unions to candidates for district attorney. However, questions to her about that issue, including asking if Becton would also support banning contributions from criminal defense attorneys, were never responded to.

The commentary begins with the claim, “Our criminal legal system was constructed to control Black people and people of color. Its injustices are not new but are deeply rooted in our country’s shameful history of slavery and legacy of racial violence. The system is acting exactly as it was intended to, and that is the problem. We should know: We’re Black, we’re female, and we’re prosecutors. We work as the gatekeepers in this flawed system.”

In that commentary, the five elected prosecutors also wrote, “ Each level of the legal system reflects a level of inherent bias, and unless we stop trying to reform the system and instead work to transform it, we will never achieve the kind of change needed to upend a system rooted in slavery. Working from within, we have begun the steps to rectify past wrongs. We are implementing policies that include declining to prosecute minor offenses, overturning wrongful convictions, refusing to take cases from officers with a history of racial bias and expunging marijuana convictions.”

“Now, we are pushing even further. We have decided to make the following 11 commitments, and we urge our fellow prosecutors to join us:

1. Do not prosecute peaceful protesters. Citizens have a right to protest, and prosecutions can antagonize marginalized communities.
2. Do not accept any funding from police unions. This will ensure our offices’ independence, and the ability to hold police accountable for injustice and misconduct.
3. Require the review of all available evidence — including body-worn camera and other video footage — in cases that rest solely on the testimony of an officer. One officer’s perspective cannot guarantee the full truth, and therefore all available evidence must be reviewed for the cases that come across our desks.
4. Ban “No Knock” warrants and reexamine our policies for issuing warrants. “No Knock” warrants are a violation of individual rights and represent an overreach of police power. They often result in unnecessary and tragic fatalities, as we saw in the case of Breonna Taylor.
5. Hold police accountable by pursuing criminal charges against officers unlawfully using excessive force and other forms of state-sanctioned violence.Each member of law enforcement must do their part to hold officers accountable for unlawful practices and misconduct to ensure the safety of every person who comes in contact with the legal system.
6. Expand our office policies on declining low-level offenses to cover decisions regarding charging and issuing warrants. By increasing our efforts to decline to prosecute certain low-level offenses, we can work to reverse the disproportionate impact the legal system has on Black people and low-income communities.
7. Financially support and advocate for increases in funding to community-led and community-defined responses, restorative justice and violence prevention programs. Investing in community-led programs is crucial to addressing the racist origins of our legal system.
8. Commit to using our office’s power and platform to advance discussions of divestment from the criminal legal system and toward community-led and community-defined responses to harm. Strong community support, restorative justice practices and diversion practices are key to dismantling the current legal system and shifting its focus from punishment toward justice.
9. Develop grant-based community reinvestment programs to be administered in partnership with community-based partners. Community programs have proved to lessen recidivism and keep people out of contact with the criminal legal system, while keeping communities safer, overall.
10. Solicit feedback from Black and brown community groups we were elected to serve through public, virtual forums in the next two weeks. Only by listening to the most impacted communities and advocates and bringing them to the table, will we truly understand their greatest needs and biggest challenges. Then, we will work together to rectify them.
11. Commit to budget transparency.A budget is a moral document, and our constituents have the right to see how we allocate our budget and what we are funding to invest in community supports and safety.”

To read the entire commentary on Politico, click here.

The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors is seeking applicants who may be interested in serving on its 19-member Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council (JJCC).

The JJCC is a multi-agency advisory body charged with creating and maintaining the County’s comprehensive Juvenile Probation Consolidated Annual Plan and coordinating county-based juvenile delinquency prevention initiatives. The state-mandated Juvenile Probation Consolidated Annual Plan is designed to improve services for Contra Costa County’s juvenile justice population by assessing existing practices and resources, identifying system needs and gaps, and prioritizing and recommending solutions.

The Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council is composed of the following 19 members:

Nine (9) ex-officio voting members:
1. Chief Probation Officer, as Chair
2. District Attorney’s Office representative
3. Public Defender’s Office representative
4. Sheriff’s Office representative
5. Board of Supervisors’ representative
6. Employment and Human Services Department representative
7. Alcohol and Other Drugs Division representative
8. Behavioral Health Division representative
9. Public Health Division representative

Ten (10) additional voting members selected and appointed by the Board of Supervisors:
10. City Police Department representative
11. County Office of Education representative
12–15. Four (4) At-Large Members, residing or working within Contra Costa County;
16–17. Two (2) Community-Based Organization representatives;
18–19. Two (2) At-Large Youth, age 14 to 21 years old, residing or working in Contra Costa County

The Board is now seeking applications for two (2) of the seats identified above:

–Two (2) Community-Based Organization representatives

This recruitment effort is for mid-term appointments to JJCC seats #16 and #17. The Board of Supervisors is looking to appoint individuals to these seats to complete the remainder of their two-year term that is set to expire on June 30, 2021.

The JJCC is expected to meet on a regular basis, at intervals to be established by the JJCC. Members will serve without compensation, stipends, or reimbursement of expenses. The community-based organization representatives should reflect the geographic, ethnic, and racial diversity of the County and should include those providing restorative justice, faith-based, or mentoring services, to justice-involved, homeless, or foster-care involved youth.

Applicants will be interviewed by the Board of Supervisors’ Public Protection Committee: Supervisors Candace Andersen, District II, and Federal Glover, District V. The nominations for the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council will then be forwarded to the full Board of Supervisors for action.

Below is a timeline of the recruitment process for the two vacancies:

• September 18, 2020: Final Day of the Application Period, due by 5:00 p.m.
• September 28, 2020: Public Protection Committee Meeting Interviews
• October 6, 2020: Board of Supervisors’ Consideration of Nominees

Application forms can be obtained from the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors by calling (925) 335-1900 or by visiting the County’s webpage at http://www.contracosta.ca.gov/3418/. Completed applications should be emailed to ClerkoftheBoard@cob.cccounty.us. Applications can also be mailed to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, CA 94553.

 

Supervisors Glover, Gioia support her efforts

By Scott Alonso, Public Information Officer, Office of the District Attorney, Contra Costa County 

On Tuesday, Contra Costa County District Attorney Diana Becton issued the following statement regarding the status of Contra Costa County’s Juvenile Hall and the Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility.

“These are historic times and we have an opportunity and a responsibility to re-imagine our justice system so that our youth have a greater chance to lead successful and enriching lives.

I am forming a Reimagine Youth Justice Task Force, which will include county departmental and community representatives, that will study and make recommendations on the most effective ways to invest in our justice involved youth through restorative, community-based solutions, with an initial focus on developing an effective process for closing Juvenile Hall.

Youth crime has been on a steady decline over the last twenty years, reinforcing the conclusion that moving away from youth incarceration is in the best interest of rehabilitation, public safety, and fiscal responsibility. Research has shown that youth can be better treated and rehabilitated in community contexts where they can retain ties to family, school, and their community. Programming and services which are based in the home or in the community are more successful at holding youth accountable and positively changing behavior than institutional settings.

Despite the steep decline in youth crime and consequent reduction in numbers of incarcerated youth, the money invested into the operation of youth prisons has not been reduced accordingly. Data shows that the average cost per incarcerated child in Contra Costa Juvenile Hall skyrocketing to over $473,000 per year.

The Reimagine Youth Justice Task Force will make explicit recommendations for financial investments in community-based services for youth instead of investing in youth prisons which have proven to result in worse outcomes for our children and families. Such an approach will allow for critical re-investments in basic needs such as housing, mental health services, and workforce development as well as support the creation of alternatives to incarcerating children in locked facilities.

In the meantime, we should pause and not take any actions to close the Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility until the Task Force has made its recommendations to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors.

This transition is urgent. The Task Force should finish its efforts by the end of this year and make evidence-based recommendations for the process to close Juvenile Hall to the Board of Supervisors in January 2021. The Task Force will present a proposed timeline and transition process for closing Juvenile Hall and will identify alternative investments for our public dollars into community-based services and programming for youth. Implementing these recommendations will create a safer community and help youth get on the right track in their lives.”

“I support District Attorney Becton’s efforts to reimagine youth justice in our County,” said District 1 Supervisor John Gioia. “We need to move away from institutionalization of young people and instead invest in community based restorative justice solutions which make us safer and are more fiscally responsible.”

“I applaud District Attorney Diana Becton’s effort to examine restorative justice alternatives to simply incarcerating our county’s youth,” District 5 Supervisor Federal Glover said. “The factors that lead young people to run afoul of the law are as varied as the youth themselves. In many cases a service-oriented approach will achieve much more in rehabilitating and helping them to become productive members of our community.”

 

By Scott Alonso, Public Information Officer, Contra Costa District Attorney

On July 10, the Honorable Patricia Scanlon sentenced the owner of NorCal K 9 Garry Reynolds (39-years-old) to two years in state prison. Earlier this year, a jury found Reynolds guilty of four felonies – all counts of animal cruelty for each dog under the care and supervision of NorCal K9, a dog training business. The jury found Reynolds was criminally negligent in the care of four animals under his company’s care in Antioch. (See related article)

Reynolds was remanded into custody immediately after he was sentenced. Judge Scanlon also denied a motion by Reynolds’ attorney to reduce the charges to misdemeanors and the motion for a new trial. Deputy District Attorney Arsh Singh prosecuted the case on behalf of the People. DDA Singh is assigned to the Felony Trial Team.

“I am satisfied the defendant will serve time in state prison due to his extreme negligence and disregard for the animals under his company’s care,” DDA Singh stated. “This case should serve as a wakeup call for any dog training company in our community. Animals deserve to be protected and treated well. Our Office will not tolerate the abuse of any animal.”

The City of Antioch started an investigation into the house where the dogs were located at 5200 Lone Tree Way. The investigation started as a code enforcement matter but progressed to a criminal investigation led by the Antioch Police Department due to a dog’s death. Two dogs were eventually euthanized due to the injuries the dogs suffered.

The investigation also led police to Devon Ashby, an employee of NorCal K9. Ashby was charged by the DA’s Office for his involvement in this case and he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of animal cruelty.

The following dogs were associated with the jury’s earlier guilty verdict:

• Gunner, Doberman
• Favor, Cane Corso
• Zeus, German Shepherd
• Rambo (Bo), Labro-Poodle

Case information: People v. Garry Reynolds, Docket Number 05-191200-5