Sacto 9-1-1

By Kim Minugh
kminugh@sacbee.com

Attorneys defending convicted cop killer Marco Antonio Topete jumped on a U.S. Supreme Court ruling handed down earlier this week and submitted a second motion for a new trial just before their client was to be sentenced this morning.

In today's session, Yolo Superior Court Judge Paul K. Richardson was to hear arguments on the previous motion, submitted by attorneys Hayes H. Gable III and Dwight M. Samuel on behalf of Topete, before potentially sentencing him.

The new motion created another delay in the trial, with the next hearing scheduled for Feb. 7.

A jury convicted Topete of the first-degree murder of Yolo County sheriff's Deputy Jose Antonio Diaz with special circumstances, including that he was lying in wait. That same jury also recommended that the 39-year-old Topete be sentenced to death for the crime.

His attorneys' first motion for a new trial took issue with Richardson's dismissal of a juror during the death penalty phase of deliberations because of concerns over the Russian-born juror's issues with the English language.

Richardson denied that motion this morning, saying he had sufficient evidence to support the juror's dismissal on grounds that she could not sufficiently understand the issues at play.

The last-minute filing of the second motion required a new hearing to allow prosecutors time to review the case. Sentencing, too, was delayed until the Feb. 7 hearing.

The defense's latest motion claims the court "prejudicially erred in finding good cause to dismiss" two prospective jurors who, during jury selection, said they did not have strong opinions for or against the death penalty.

Gable and Samuel cited a Supreme Court decision that a trial court "prejudicially erred when it excused a juror for cause who did not have strong views on capital punishment," according to the motion. A new penalty phase in that trial will follow.

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