Sacto 9-1-1

By Hudson Sangree
hsangree@sacbee.com

RCB_20100211_GALVAN_ 014.JPGYolo County prosecutors will try today for the third time to secure guilty verdicts against two brothers accused of resisting arrest.

The brothers - Ernesto and Fermin Galvan - say they are the victims of brutality by West Sacramento police. Ernesto Galvan's skull remains scarred and misshapen, allegedly from the officers' baton blows.

Juries in two prior trials were unable to reach verdicts. Opening statements in the third trial of the Galvan brothers are scheduled for 9 a.m. today in Yolo Superior Court, Dept. 2, in Woodland.

In February, jurors said they had reached an impasse in the brothers' second trial. Judge Timothy Fall, who will be presiding again today, declared a mistrial.

A previous trial ended in a hung jury in November 2007.

The charges - and an unresolved federal lawsuit filed by the brothers against police - stem from a June 2005 incident, in which Ernesto Galvan was repeatedly shot with Taser stun guns and struck in the head with batons, according to the lawsuit.

His skull and face were fractured; he spent weeks in a coma and he has permanent mental and physical impairments, the lawsuit claims.

Photos at trial showed him lying in a pool of his own blood.

Officers struck Fermin Galvan with batons, leaving him bruised, unconscious and missing teeth, the lawsuit claims.

During closing arguments in February, prosecutor Carolyn Palumbo told jurors the injuries resulted from the brothers' crimes against officers, and they had no one to blame but themselves.

She said Officer Donald Schlie approached the brothers at about 3 a.m. June 14, 2005, in an area of West Sacramento known for crime.

Ernesto Galvan was sweating and appeared to be under the influence of a controlled substance, she said. The officer ordered him to take his hands out of his pockets. When he didn't comply, the officer grabbed his arm, she said.

Ernesto Galvan pulled back and struck the officer in the chin, she said. "Right there, the fight was on, " she told jurors.

The ensuing struggle lasted several minutes and was joined by other officers. Taser stun guns had little effect on the out-of-control man, Palumbo said. The exhausted officers suffered cuts and bruises and feared for their safety, she said.

They struck Ernesto Galvan with batons, but ultimately used restraint, she argued. "He's alive, " Palumbo told jurors. "The officers didn't shoot him, and they could have."

Fermin Galvan came at an officer and had to be taken down, she said.

Defense lawyer Alan Greenstein told jurors in February that the officers were the aggressors against two men who'd done nothing wrong.

The brothers were standing under a street light, talking about work problems, he said. They hadn't committed any crimes, and they did not have drugs or weapons, he said.

Officers used excessive force and tried to cover themselves by filing charges, Greenstein argued. He called the officers' trial testimony inconsistent and unreliable.

"Don't you think they had to come up with some justification for why he (Ernesto Galvan) ended up on the ground lying in a pool of blood?" Greenstein asked the jurors.

The federal lawsuit asked for $12 million in damages. Guilty verdicts would make it much harder to secure monetary damages in the civil case.

Call The Bee's Hudson Sangree, (916) 321-1191.

Photo caption: Lisandro Galvan, 23, left, listens as his brothers who were defendants Fermin Galvan, 33, center, and Ernesto Galvan, 32, right, are briefed by their attorney at Yolo Superior Court in February. (Renee C. Byer/rbyer@sacbee.com)

About Comments

Reader comments on Sacbee.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Sacramento Bee. If you see an objectionable comment, click the "report abuse" button below it. We will delete comments containing inappropriate links, obscenities, hate speech, and personal attacks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. See more about comments here.

What You Should Know About Comments on Sacbee.com

Sacbee.com is happy to provide a forum for reader interaction, discussion, feedback and reaction to our stories. However, we reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments or ban users who can't play nice. (See our full terms of service here.)

Here are some rules of the road:

• Keep your comments civil. Don't insult one another or the subjects of our articles. If you think a comment violates our guidelines click the "report abuse" button to notify the moderators. Responding to the comment will only encourage bad behavior.

• Don't use profanities, vulgarities or hate speech. This is a general interest news site. Sometimes, there are children present. Don't say anything in a way you wouldn't want your own child to hear.

• Do not attack other users; focus your comments on issues, not individuals.

• Stay on topic. Only post comments relevant to the article at hand. If you want to discuss an issue with a specific user, click on his profile name and send him a direct message.

• Do not copy and paste outside material into the comment box.

• Don't repeat the same comment over and over. We heard you the first time.

• Do not use the commenting system for advertising. That's spam and it isn't allowed.

• Don't use all capital letters. That's akin to yelling and not appreciated by the audience.

You should also know that The Sacramento Bee does not screen comments before they are posted. You are more likely to see inappropriate comments before our staff does, so we ask that you click the "report abuse" button to submit those comments for moderator review. You also may notify us via email at feedback@sacbee.com. Note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us the profile name of the user who made the comment. Remember, comment moderation is subjective. You may find some material objectionable that we won't and vice versa.

If you submit a comment, the user name of your account will appear along with it. Users cannot remove their own comments once they have submitted them, but you may ask our staff to retract one of your comments by sending an email to feedback@sacbee.com. Again, make sure you note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us your profile name.

hide comments
blog comments powered by Disqus


About Sacto 9-1-1

Sacto 9-1-1 is a blog on crime and emergency services news in the Sacramento region.

Send feedback on Sacto 9-1-1 to Assistant Metro Editor Anthony Sorci at asorci@sacbee.com

Subscribe to Breaking News Alerts

FOLLOW US | Get more from sacbee.com | Follow us on Twitter | Become a fan on Facebook | Get news in your inbox | View our mobile versions | e-edition: Print edition online | What our bloggers are saying

Sacto 9-1-1 Q&A

Q: What happened with the case regarding Marc McCormick? He was accused of videotaping a woman in her home and was arrested. He lives in my neighborhood and I see him all the time. Were charges dropped?


A: According to Sacramento Superior Court online records, misdemeanor charges have been filed against Mark William McCormick, alleging that he used a camcorder or other instrument to view an individual in a place where there was an expectation of privacy, trespassing and peeping.

His next court date is June 4.

According to Sacramento police logs, McCormick, 40, was arrested March 8 after the victim reported that a friend had entered her home without her knowledge to secretly videotape her.


715 questions answered | Submit a question

May 2012

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    

Monthly Archives


Kim Minugh on Twitter

Follow "Kim_Minugh" on Twitter

Local Agencies on Twitter

Categories