Due Sept. 24; Academy begins Oct. 13

By Scott Alonso, PIO, Contra Costa County Office of the District Attorney

District Attorney Diana Becton announced Tuesday, that the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office will launch a fourth Community Academy class this October. The goal of the academy will be to strengthen community relations and provide residents a better understanding of our criminal justice system. Given the COVID-19 pandemic, this fall’s class will be limited, and social distancing measures will be followed. Participants will be required to wear a mask while participating during the academy.

The academy is free and is open to residents who live or work in Contra Costa County. Individuals must complete an application and background check when they apply. Residents can access an application on our website or residents may also apply in-person at one of our offices at the following locations:

• 900 Ward Street, Martinez, CA 94553
• 10 Douglas Drive Suite 130, Martinez, CA 94553
• 100 37th St. Room 220, Richmond, CA 94805

Residents can submit the applications to the attention of Scott Alonso. Applicants may also email DA-CommunityAcademy@contracostada.org with their completed application. The application period ends on September 24, 2021.

The Community Academy will be made up of at least 10 individuals for a 9-week course held at the DA’s Office in downtown Martinez, 900 Ward Street from 5:30-7:30 p.m. every Wednesday starting October 13, 2021. The Community Academy, which is similar to Citizens’ Academies hosted by many law enforcement agencies, is the only academy of its kind at a District Attorney’s Office in Northern California.

The academy helps underscore the office’s commitment to engaging and educating residents of Contra Costa County. Admitted applicants can expect to learn how cases are filed, the different types of crimes our office investigates and prosecutes, and the work we do not only prosecuting cases but also the community outreach efforts underway to prevent crime and to support children, parents and crime victims. The comprehensive overview by our office will allow residents to get an in-depth examination and review of the criminal justice system in our community.

Faces possible prison sentence of almost 35 years

By Scott Alonso, PIO, Contra Costa County Office of the District Attorney

Earlier this month, defendant Brandon Lamont Lindsey of Antioch (born March 20, 1994) was found guilty as charged for the attempted murder and attempted robbery of a Yuba City man. Further, a Contra Costa County jury found true the enhancements listed in the charges against Lindsey, including the discharge of a firearm causing great bodily injury.

Antioch Police believed the incident to be an attempted robbery at the time. (See related article)

On September 21, 2018, Lindsey arranged to sell opioids to the victim and the victim’s partner in Antioch. Specifically, Lindsey told the victim to meet him on Cavallo Road. Before this meeting, the victim and defendant did not know each or other. The drug sale was set up by a mutual friend of the victim. Upon the pair meeting for the first time on Cavallo Road, Lindsey instructed the victim to bring his car down an isolated road for the sale.

Lindsey conveyed to the victim that his associate would bring the pills in a separate car. Moments after the victim moved his car, another car was positioned and blocked the driveway, which prevented the victim from leaving the scene. Lindsey approached the victim and pulled out a firearm and demanded money. Lindsey fired three times inside the car at point blank range. One bullet struck the victim through his left arm causing a partial loss of mobility in his left hand. Lindsey used a 9mm handgun during the attempted murder and attempted robbery.

In total, the jury found Lindsey guilty of four counts:

• Attempted Murder
  • Enhancement 1, Personal and Intentional Discharge of a Firearm, Causing Great Bodily Injury
• Shooting at Occupied Motor Vehicle
  • Enhancement 2, Personal and Intentional Discharge of a Firearm, Causing Great Bodily Injury
• Assault with a Semiautomatic Firearm
  • Enhancement 3, Use of a Firearm
• Attempted Second Degree Robbery
  • Enhancement 4, Personal and Intentional Discharge of a Firearm, Causing Great Bodily Injury

Deputy District Attorney Kate Dunbar prosecuted the case on behalf of the People. The defendant will be sentenced on October 15 before the Honorable Charles Burch. Lindsey faces up to 34 years and 8 months to life in state prison. The case was investigated by the Antioch Police Department.

Case information: People v. Brandon Lamont Lindsey, Docket Number 05-200113-9.

Allen Payton contributed to this report.

 

Today, the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office is sharing important tips for consumers to avoid rental scams.

What is a rental scam?

Scammers will list properties for rent online (i.e., Craigslist, Facebook Marketplace) even though they do not own them or have authority to rent them out. The scammer will attempt to have a prospective renter wire transfer or demand cash payment for the lease and or deposit, by claiming they can rent it but are not available to show it now.

Different kinds of rental scams

• Knockoff listings: When searching for properties be on the lookout for listings that have been copied and pasted from a legitimate listing but then offered at a low price.
• Illegal sublets: A scammer has obtained access to a listed property and begins to show the unit as if the unit is their own property or have authority to rent out.
• Ghost rentals: Scammers will list properties that are not for rent or do not exist and try to lure a victim in with a promise of low rent and great amenities. Their goal is to get the victims money before they find out.

Identifying scams

• Scammers will request a wire transfer for a first month’s rent, security deposit, application fees or vacation rental fees if applicable as a wire transfer. Please note, a wire transfer is equivalent to handing over cash.
• The scammer will request funds prior to signing the lease or viewing the property with the excuse that the property is in high demand, adding an urgency to the transaction. The scammer will claim to have a list of other possible renters who are also interested in the property.
• Scammer will claim they are out of the country by alleging they have an agent or lawyer working on their behalf.

Tips to avoid rental scams

• Verify who owns the unit or building. To ensure that the person renting the unit is the legitimate owner or property manager, do an online search or visit the Contra Costa County Recorder’s office. The Contra Costa County Recorder’soffice is located at 555 Escobar St, Martinez CA 94553.
• Conduct an Internet search using a search engine such as Google or Bing by entering in the listed address, agent or alleged homeowners name, email and phone number. Be suspicious of images that may be generated from Multiple Listing Service (MLS). MLS is a service realtor’s frequently use to list properties for prospective buyers. Scammers will crop and adjust these photos for their own use in fraudulent their ads.
• Legitimate landlords will arrange a tour of the interior of the property without excuse or hesitation. Before any money is exchanged, the landlord will take in an application to do a background check.
• Landlords will usually accept a personal check, a cashier’s check or money order for the first month’s rent and security deposit.
• Never provide an advance payment, money is usually not exchanged until a legitimate lease is signed. Do not agree to pay anything in cash or via wire transfer.
• Be wary of giving your personal information until you verify the leasing party before any personal information is given.
• Ask detailed questions about the unit, application and move in dates/process. Scammers do not want to answer detailed questions because they are only after the initial deposit. In doing so they will end communication or ignore the questions or answers will contain strange grammar.
• If a deal is too good to be true, it usually is!

¿Qué es una estafa de alquiler?

Un estafador enumera propiedades para alquiler en línea (Craigslist, Facebook Marketplace, etc.) aunque no sean dueños de la propiedad ni tengan autoridad para alquilarlas. El estafador intentará enganchar un posible inquilino en que realice una transferencia bancaria o exigir pago en efectivo para el arrendamiento o depósito, aportando que puede y tiene autoridad de alquilarlo, pero no está disponible para mostrarlo en este momento.

Diferentes tipos de estafas de alquiler

• Listados de imitación: Cuando busque propiedades, esté atento a los listados que se hayan copiado y pegado de un listado legítimo, pero que luego se ofrezcan a un precio bajo.
• Subarrendamientos ilegales:un estafador ha obtenido acceso a una propiedad que figura en la lista y comienza a mostrarla como si fuera su propia propiedad o tuviera autoridad para alquilarla.
• Alquilares Inexistentes: el estafador listara listados de las propiedades que no están para alquiler o que no existen y tratará de atraer a la víctima con la promesa de un alquiler bajo y comodidades increibles. El objetivo es de estafar la victima antes de que se enteren que el trato es fraudulento.

Como identificar estafas

Los estafadores solicitarán una transferencia bancaria para el primer mes de el alquiler, depósito de seguridad y otros cobros relacionados con el alquiler. Tenga en cuenta que una transferencia bancaria equivale a entregar dinero en efectivo.

El estafador solicitará fondos antes de firmar el contrato de arrendamiento o antes de poder ver la propiedad con la excusa de que la propiedad tiene gran demanda, agregando una urgencia en la transacción. El estafador afirmará tener una lista de otros posibles inquilinos que también están interesados ​​en la propiedad.

El estafador afirmará que está fuera del país alegando que tiene un agente o abogado trabajando en su nombre.

Consejos para evitar estafas de alquiler

Verifique quién es el propietario de la unidad o el edificio. Para asegurarse de que la persona que alquila la unidad es el propietario legítimo o el administrador de la propiedad, realice una búsqueda en línea o visite las oficinas de registradores del condado. La oficina del registrador del condado de Contra Costa está ubicada en 555 Escobar St, Martinez CA 94553.

https://www.ccclerkrec.us/clerk/

Realice una búsqueda por internet utilizando búscador como Google o Bing ingresando la dirección, el correo electrónico, el número de teléfono y el supuesto agente o propietario de la casa que figuran en la lista. Sospeche de las imágenes que puedan generarse a partir de Multiple Listing Service (MLS). MLS es un servicio que agentes de bienes raíces utilizan con frecuencia para publicar propiedades para posibles compradores. Los estafadores recortan y ajustan estas fotos para su propio uso en sus anuncios fraudulentos.

Los propietarios legítimos organizara un recorrido por el interior de la propiedad sin excusa ni vacilación. Antes de que intercambie el dinero, un arrendador legitimo presentará una solicitud para realizar una verificación de antecedentes.

Los propietarios generalmente aceptarán un cheque personal, un cheque de caja o un giro postal por el primer meses de alquiler y depósito de seguridad.

Nunca proporcione un pago por adelantado, el dinero generalmente no se intercambia hasta que se firma un contrato de arrendamiento legítimo. No acepte pagar nada en efectivo o mediante transferencia bancaria.

Tenga cuidado de no dar su información personal a un estafador que pretende tener un contrato de arrendamiento legítimo, asegúrese de verificar la parte del arrendamiento antes de proporcionar cualquier información personal.

Haga preguntas detalladas sobre la unidad, la solicitud, las fechas de mudanza y el proceso de mudanza, etc. Los estafadores no quieren responder a preguntas detalladas porque están de tras del depósito inicial. Al hacerlo, terminarán la comunicación, ignorarán las preguntas o las respuestas contendrán gramática extraña.

Si un trato es demasiado bueno para ser verdad, ¡por lo general lo es!

 

 

Will serve one year in county jail

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

Martinez, Calif. – Yesterday, Monday, July 12, 2021, former Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder Joe Canciamilla pled guilty to perjury and grand theft, totaling nine counts, for illegal activity tied to his multiple political campaign bank accounts. The District Attorney’s Office filed criminal charges against Canciamilla last year. Canciamilla resigned in 2019.

Canciamilla will serve 365 days in county jail per his guilty plea. Per the court, the Sheriff’s Office will determine how the custody time will be served. In addition, he was sentenced to two years formal probation by the Honorable Leslie G. Landu.  Due to his felony conviction, Canciamilla will not be able to act as an attorney and he will report his criminal conviction to the California State Bar. Further, he may no longer hold public office or any other elected office.

Canciamilla committed felony perjury for his misstatements on campaign disclosure statements (Form 460s). Canciamilla signed these campaign finance statements under the penalty of perjury. The illegal activity was conducted from 2010 to 2016. The grand theft counts against Canciamilla related to the use of campaign funds for his personal use.

The personal expenditures made by Canciamilla’s campaign committees for his own personal use were:

• Personal vacation to Asia
• Restaurants
• Airfare via Southwest Airlines and American Airlines
• Repayment of a Personal Loan
• Transfers from his Campaign Bank Accounts to his Personal Accounts

In 2019, Canciamilla was fined $150,000 by the California Fair Political Practices Commission in a civil stipulation for his inaccurate campaign finance statements, which concealed the personal use of campaign funds for his own benefit.

The case was prosecuted by Deputy District Attorney Steven Bolen. DDA Bolen is assigned to our Office’s Public Corruption Unit.

Case information: People v. Joseph Canciamilla, Docket Number 01-193934-7.

Following 2018 complaint filed by Contra Costa County resident with California Attorney General’s Office.

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

Martinez, Calif. – On May 20, the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office, in conjunction with the District Attorneys’ Offices of Ventura, Sonoma, and San Joaquin Counties, entered into a negotiated settlement agreement with former MoviePass affiliated executives, Theodore Farnsworth and Mitchell Lowe, for engaging in numerous unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent business acts and practices, while overseeing the operations of the now defunct movie theater subscription service. CCCDA MoviePass Documents

In total, Farnsworth and Lowe will have to pay $400,000 in civil penalties and cy pres restitution, as part of the signed Stipulated Judgment approved by the Honorable Nancy Davis Stark. In addition to the monetary payments, Farnsworth and Lowe are enjoined from engaging in any of the alleged unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business acts or practices committed during their tenure as MoviePass managers. The settlement gets divided by all the DA’s involved and some goes to the state. The DA’s then use the monies for consumer protection activities.

MoviePass, Inc. (MoviePass) was an American subscription-based movie ticket service headquarter in New York City. Founded in 2011, the service initially allowed subscribers to purchase up to three movie tickets per month for a discounted monthly fee. The service utilized a mobile phone app where users checked into a theater and chose a movie and showtime, which resulted in the cost of the ticket being loaded by MoviePass to a prepaid MoviePass debit card, which was then used to purchase the ticket from the movie theater.

In 2017, Helios and Matheson Analytics purchased MoviePass. Around the time of the purchase, the business model for MoviePass, shifted from a three movie per month subscription to offering, among other things, an “unlimited” subscription plan at $9.95 a month and an “unlimited” fixed rate annual subscription. However, over the course of the next two years, the business model and terms of service changed multiple times to the detriment of the consumers.
After the acquisition of MoviePass by Helios and Matheson Analytics, the Defendants engaged in numerous unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent acts and practices. These acts and practices include, but are not limited to:

• Falsely advertising that MoviePass subscriptions offer “unlimited” movie watching. Specifically, “any movie”, “any day”, at “any theater”, when in reality MoviePass continually added limitations to customers’ subscriptions.
• Unconscionably changing terms of service during a subscription period.
• Converting all prepaid “unlimited” plans to three movies per month.
• Shutting down the availability of movies when a certain dollar amount is reached. (Trip wire).
• Failing to notify autorenewal customers of material changes to their subscriptions.
• Continuously charging customers’ debit or credit cards after receiving notice of cancellation from customers.

In addition to the above acts and practices, in 2019, MoviePass suffered a data breach. The data breach was the result of a MoviePass engineer creating an unsecured and unencrypted server as a debugging tool. This server had more than 161 million pieces of personal identifying information, including names, MoviePass card numbers, credit card numbers, billing information, email addresses and login information, belonging to at least 58,000 consumers. Despite being notified by private individuals, MoviePass allowed this server to operate for three months before it was taken down. MoviePass failed to advise the California Attorney General’s Office of the data breach, as required by law.

MoviePass shut down its operations in September of 2019. Both MoviePass and its parent company, Helios and Matheson Analytics, filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in January of 2020.

In 2018 a local Contra Costa County resident filed a complaint against MoviePass with the California Attorney General’s Office. The complaint alleged that MoviePass was in violation of the Terms of Service as the company was not showing available tickets in the mobile app and limited the number of movies to the consumer even though they paid in advance for a year of “unlimited” service. In turn, the complaint was forwarded to our office for further investigation.

We welcome residents to file consumer complaints with our office via our website, www.contracostada.org. Case information: People v. Theodore Farnsworth and Mitchell Lowe, Docket C21-01045, Contra Costa County Superior Court.

Life in prison for him, 25 years to life in prison for her

Antioch Police forensic artist’s sketch helped lead to their arrest

By Allen Payton

Homicide Case Update: Defendants Tearri Richard and Lakia Poles were sentenced on Friday, March 26, 2021 in Contra Costa County Superior Court for the road rage murder of 57-year-old Oakland resident Raul Garcia in Antioch on Sept. 1, 2019. (See related articles here, here, here and here)

Defendant Richard was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole and defendant Poles was sentenced to 25 years to life. Both defendants were age 26 at the time of the murder and will serve their time in state prison. DDA Aron DeFerrari prosecuted the case on behalf of the People.

“Raul Garcia, the man Tearri Richard and Lakia Poles viciously murdered over a traffic dispute, received justice today,” said DDA DeFerrari. “It is unfathomable that a man’s life could be taken over disagreement about a lane merger that didn’t even result in a collision, yet defendants Richard and Poles hunted Raul Garcia down in the street and killed him for something that trivial; they both deserve the life sentences they were given.”

“The justice achieved today was only possible due to the outstanding investigation by the Antioch Police Department and their top-notch Detective Division,” he added.

On their Facebook page on Sunday, March 21 the Antioch Police Department posted praise for their sketch artist that helped lead to the couple’s arrest:

“On September 1, 2019, Raul Garcia was murdered after a road rage incident in Antioch. Members of the APD Investigations Bureau began investigating the case and learned of a witness to the incident. Detective Jeong (who is a forensic sketch artist) met with the witness and developed a sketch of the suspect. In the following weeks, detectives obtained additional evidence which led to the arrest of Tearri Richard and Lakia Poles. On November 24, 2020, a jury found both Richard and Poles guilty of murder. Last week, Richard was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole, and Poles was sentenced to 25-years-to-life. As you can see, Detective Jeong has a special talent in the field of forensic sketches, and we are very lucky he is a member of our team.

The Antioch Police Department will not tolerate violent crime in our city and works hard to achieve justice. We do this not just for our community, but also in memory of those who are lost to senseless violence. We are grateful to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office, especially Deputy District Attorney Aron DeFerrari, for his tireless prosecution of this case.

On behalf of the men and women of APD, we express our condolences to the Garcia family.”

Had suspended contractor’s license at the time; occurred in San Ramon

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

On Monday, March 1, 2021, the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office filed a felony complaint against Segundo Collazos, the owner of Amazon’s Landscaping Company based out of Concord. (See Complaint Collazos February 2021)

The charges relate to the 2018 death of Manuel Peralta, then 68, of Antioch, California, who died while operating a rented tree stump grinder in San Ramon. At the time of the incident, defendant Segundo Collazos had a suspended license with the Contractors State License Board. The investigation began from the California Department of Industrial Relations’ Division of Occupational Safety & Health Bureau of Investigations.

The first felony alleges that defendant Collazos permitted the victim Manuel Peralta to use a stump grinder in a manner contrary to manufacturer recommendations and to work in the danger zone of the cutting wheel, resulting in his death. The second felony alleges that Collazos failed to properly train Peralta on the proper and safe use of the stump grinder, also resulting in his death.

The District Attorney’s Office reminds homeowners to check that a contractor is currently licensed and insured before hiring them for residential construction work. Homeowners can check the validity of a license number on the Contractors’ State Licensing Board website or call (800) 321-CSLB (2752).

“When a Cal/OSHA investigation reveals evidence a worker’s serious injury or death involves criminal misconduct, our Bureau of Investigations Unit refers those cases to the local District Attorney’s Office for prosecution,” said Cal/OSHA Chief Doug Parker. “We thank the Contra Costa County District Attorney for their work on this case. Employers must be made aware that disregarding the requirement to train and supervise workers using dangerous equipment can lead to tragedy and possible jail time.”

Deputy District Attorney Ryan Morris is prosecuting the case on behalf of the People. DDA Morris is assigned to our Office’s Special Operations Division.

Case information: People v. Segundo Collazos, Docket Number 01-195521-0.

By Allen Payton

Contra Costa County District Attorney Diana Becton issued a statement regarding Thursday’s California Supreme Court decision to uphold the constitutionality of Senate Bill 1391 (Lara).

Proposition 57, passed in the November 2016 general election, requires prosecutors to commence all cases involving a minor in juvenile court. Senate Bill No. 1391 enacted in 2018, amended Proposition 57 to prohibit minors under the age of 16 from being transferred to adult criminal court.

In the case of O.G. v. The Superior Court of Ventura County, the Court of Appeal held that Senate Bill 1391 is inconsistent with Proposition 57 and thus invalid. The state Supreme Court overruled the lower court’s decision.

“We agree with the majority view that Senate Bill 1391 was a permissible amendment to Proposition 57 and we reverse the judgment in this case,” the decision reads.

“Today’s unanimous decision by the Supreme Court is an important moment for the criminal justice system to give children a chance at rehabilitation for crimes they committed during their youth,” said Becton. “I have always believed this law was constitutional and should be followed. Our local judges in Contra Costa County have also agreed with me.”

“The juvenile justice system currently is not working,” she continued. “I established a task force to examine how to reform our juvenile justice system. We must think differently on how we treat children and ensure we strategically allocate resources to focus on prevention and rehabilitation efforts.”

The full Supreme Court decision is available here.

Scott Alonso, PIO, CCCDA contributed to this report.