Juvenile Loophole

Re-Sentencing, Semantics, and Gascon

Thanks to the California Globe for running this piece. You can visit the website at: https://californiaglobe.com/

Note - many other progressive prosecutors across the nation have similar policies to Gascon’s - again, most of the bad ideas of late have started in California.

In the before time – the long long ago – when a Los Angeles juvenile committed an especially egregious crime he (do not complain about the pronouns in this article – they’re mostly guys) faced the possibility of being prosecuted as an adult.

As we know, Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon has proudly made sure that has happened under his watch and has even gone so far as to prosecute adults as juveniles if they were not caught until after they turned 18. 

One of the most notable instances of that policy in practice was the case of James Tubbs, who attacked a 10-year-old girl in a restaurant bathroom but was not caught until he was charged with murdering a friend with a rock in Bakersfield and his DNA was run through the system and he was finally arrested for the rape.

But he committed the attack just before he turned 18 so Gascon charged him as a juvenile.  Besides that absurd break, Tubbs – correctly sensing Gascon’s office’s strident wokeness -  then declared himself transgender and that his name was Hannah; if Bakersfield hadn’t immediately transferred him from LA to face the murder charge, Tubbs would have spent a couple of years – max – in juvie for the attack.  By the way, in girl’s juvie.

Gascon, however, has gone further than simply not trying any juveniles as adults – he is actively pursuing the re-sentencing of juveniles who were tried as adults and are now in prison.

In 2006, then 15-year-old Ramiro Munoz shot and killed the 19-year-old Marco Juarez, Jr. Juarez and his friends had stopped at a food truck to pick up snacks.  The friends got out of the car and then gang member Munoz drove by, yelled at Juarez – possibly mistaking him for a member of a rival gang – and, as Juarez – fearing trouble - was moving the car into place to quickly pick up his friends Munoz shot him twice, hitting Juarez in the head and neck.  He died in a hospital the next day.

Munoz was tried as an adult and sentenced to 50 years to life.

Thursday, according to former deputy district attorney and now pro bono victim’s advocate Kathleen Cady,  Munoz will almost certainly have that sentenced reduced to 15 years to life, making him eligible for parole immediately.

It will be reduced, stressed Cady, because Gascon’s office is making it possible by not contesting the re-sentencing request - technically, allowing the transfer of the case back to juvenile court for re-sentencing.

Cady added that the process includes Gascon’s office reaching out to victim’s families.  But instead of it being a “hey, here’s what happening – tell us what you think” type of call as it was in the past, it’s far more like a high-pressure sales pitch now.  Those “victim’s advocates” making the calls have for the most part been brought in from the public defender’s office who “try to manipulate the family from the very beginning” to get them to either go along with the new deal or at least make sure they don’t complain about it too much.

“They’re doing retroactive plea deals,” Cady said.

Munoz’s case is far from unique.  While the DA’s office refuses to tell Cady exactly how many juveniles tried as adults are in the re-sentencing pipeline, the potential number of similar cases that have already happened and will soon occur is in the hundreds.

“That universe is huge,” Cady said.

The process – especially with Gascon greasing the wheels – is relatively simple.  Offender A files either a re-sentencing motion or possibly for a writ of habeas corpus as is being done with adult offenders trying to get out - https://thomas699.substack.com/p/woke-prosecutors-freed-killers .

Gascon’s office then rolls over and says fine and does not contest the motion before the judge.  What that tends to mean is that the motion is granted.

Whether or not Gascon’s office is actively prompting defense attorneys is not technically known, but that is beside the point - considering the number of former public defenders in his office and his widely-advertised policy, he may as well be calling up prisoners’ lawyers personally.

In other words, if your store is literally giving away free stuff you tend not to have to go pick up and drive the customers to the store.

One semantic trick being used by offenders – and being allowed by Gascon’s office – is the claim that when they were juveniles they were denied a “transfer (from juvenile to adult court) hearing.”

That may technically be true, because until recently such hearings were called “fitness hearings.”  Those fitness hearings were, in fact, the transfer hearings, but since they now have a different name Cady said offenders are using that technicality – with Gascon’s concurrence – to base their re-sentencing motions on.

And for the vast majority of “juvenile” offenders, once re-sentenced they almost immediately become eligible for parole and can be back on the streets far more quickly than they would otherwise.

In Munoz’s case, up to 30 years early.

Gascon’s office did not respond to a request for comment.