By Ryan Olsen
Chico Enterprise-Record
OROVILLE, Calif. — A hearing was delayed until January for a Butte County Jail worker charged with allegedly taking bribes from inmates.
Butte County Superior Court Judge Clare Keithley ruled there was insufficient time Thursday to complete the preliminary examination of Efrain Mendoza, who was a correctional technician at the jail.
The hearing was set to determine if there is sufficient evidence to hold Mendoza for trial on 10 felony counts five counts of forgery, three counts of accepting a bribe and two counts of soliciting a bribe.
Mendoza maintained records for the Sheriff’s Work Alternative Program at the jail.
The Butte County Sheriff’s Office has alleged the defendant falsified the community service records of six inmates in exchange for cash and services, including tattoos.
As part of the hearing, defense attorney Jesse Santana made several motions, including a request to suppress statements Mendoza made to law enforcement.
Santana argued Mendoza was compelled to give a statement to a joint investigation by the Sheriff’s Office and the District Attorney’s Office. According to Santana’s motion, investigators from both departments repeatedly urged Mendoza to give a statement when they searched his house on Aug. 8.
Although Mendoza reportedly asked to speak with his attorneys, the investigators persisted, the motion states. Mendoza ultimately gave a statement to a district attorney’s investigator when a sheriff’s sergeant said the defendant needed to talk if there was going to be an administrative solution to the matter.
Deputy district attorney Robert Thomas III said the Sheriff’s Office and the District Attorney’s Office ran separate investigations. He said he doesn’t have access to statements that Mendoza may have been compelled to make to the sheriff’s internal affairs bureau.
Outside of court, Thomas said the sheriff’s sergeant was at Mendoza’s house during the search, but it was to recover county property. He also said he and the sergeant monitored a voluntary interview between the district attorney’s investigator and Mendoza.
Because of his concern about potentially inadmissible evidence being aired during the preliminary examination, Santana asked the court to close the hearing to the public. He argued it was needed because potential jurors may read about the possibly inadmissible evidence and affect their ability to determine which statements are true.
Under the law, a preliminary hearing may be closed if the defense requests it and the court determines it’s necessary to protect the defendant’s right to a fair trial.
Thomas said the closure wasn’t necessary and suggested there may be other remedies.
The Enterprise-Record and Mercury-Register also objected to the defense’s request to exclude the public.
After consulting with its legal counsel, this newspaper cited the 1999 case of NBC Subsidiary v. Superior Court. The California Supreme Court’s ruling in that case governs the closure of court hearings.
The ruling calls for courts to hold a hearing for closure requests and determine if it meets four criteria. Elements include if there is a substantial probability that an open hearing would harm the defendant’s right to a fair trial and that there are essentially no other alternatives, such as extensively interviewing potential jurors or changing the trial venue.
Judge Keithley didn’t rule on the motions Thursday. She asked the attorneys to file documents supporting their arguments and they would be addressed on the new hearing date, Jan. 20.
Mendoza is out of custody on bail.
Copyright 2011 MediaNews Group, Inc. and ANG Newspapers
All Rights Reserved