By Juan Montoya
The apparently unilateral decision by a Cameron County Asst. District Attorney to order Justice of the Peace staffs not to process downgraded misdemeanor cases from the five county courts-at-law that results in defendants only paying a fine for their case to be dismissed has stirred a hornets' nest.
The staffs of justices of the peace across the county received an email Monday from Asst. DA Rene Garza ordering them to cease processing cases downgraded by other Asst. DA's in the county's five county courts-at-law after plea bargaining with defense attorneys.
The email was sent to the staffs by Garza and not by Cameron County Attorney Luis V. Saenz, they said.
The email indicates that the freeze on processing such cases will last "until further notice," said a JP staffer who spoke on condition of anonymity.
"The way it works is that sometimes the Asst. DA's in the county courts agree with a defense attorney that, say, an assault case is weak, they don't have a record, or that they can't find a witness to testify," she said. "They reach a plea bargain to knock it down from Class A, the most serious, or Class B, to Class C, the least serious. The defense attorney then comes to the (JP) n office, pays the $500 fine and the $102 in court costs and the court-at-law dismisses it."
The benefits to the defendant are obvious. A Class C conviction is like paying a traffic ticket and won't negatively affect a person's record as would a Class A or Class B. A Class A misdemeanor charge carries a fine up to $4,000 and a year in jail.
A Class B misdemeanor conviction carries up to $180 days in jail and a $2,000 fine.
A Class C theft charge, for example, involves amounts of less than $100.
The JP staffer said it is unknown how many such plea cases are in the pipeline, but said she had turned away a few attorneys who had negotiated a downgrading of their clients' charges with the Asst. DAs in the county courts-at-law.
"They couldn't believe it," she said. "It's a normal part of their profession. Nobody ever told them that the plea bargain they negotiated for their clients would not be accepted here."
A local attorney who was contacted by El Rrun-Rrun said he was unaware the DA's office has placed a moratorium on negotiating pleas on misdemeanor cases in the courts-at-law until he approached an Asst. DA for one of his clients.
"He told me that it was on hold," he said. "But he wouldn't tell me why. In my client's case, the only witness in the case might have left the area and can't be found, so it would be next to impossible to try the case. Now I know. We'll have to go to trial. It doesn't make any fiscal sense."
Since the email was directed from Garza to the JP staffs and not to the office holder, it has raised a lot of eyebrows among the elected officials. Can an Asst. District Attorney tell the staff of an elected official what cases to process? And why direct the email to the staff?
Several sources say that there is an undercurrent of personal vendetta fueling the Garza moratorium on downgraded misdemeanor cases going fro county courts-at-law. They say that what triggered Garza's email was learning that JP 2-2 Johnathan Gracia had negotiated a plea for one of his clients to a Class C misdemeanor. Although Gracia did not go to his JP court to pay the $500 fine, the sources said it irked Garza to no end.
"Right after that Garza issued the email to the JP courts," said a county court-at-law staffer. "It was pretty obvious why he was doing it."
Although the attorney ho negotiated a misdemeanor to a Class C does not know when Garza will terminate the freeze on misdemeanor pleas, he said the personal nature of the motive has angered many of his fellow attorneys.
"It's pretty obvious why Rene did this and it's throwing a wrench in the works," he said. "There are people being affected by this through no fault of their own. The county courts-at-law are going to get backlogged in no time and the judges are going to want to know why. If Rene wasn't liked before, he's going to be liked even less now."
The apparently unilateral decision by a Cameron County Asst. District Attorney to order Justice of the Peace staffs not to process downgraded misdemeanor cases from the five county courts-at-law that results in defendants only paying a fine for their case to be dismissed has stirred a hornets' nest.
The staffs of justices of the peace across the county received an email Monday from Asst. DA Rene Garza ordering them to cease processing cases downgraded by other Asst. DA's in the county's five county courts-at-law after plea bargaining with defense attorneys.
The email was sent to the staffs by Garza and not by Cameron County Attorney Luis V. Saenz, they said.
The email indicates that the freeze on processing such cases will last "until further notice," said a JP staffer who spoke on condition of anonymity.
"The way it works is that sometimes the Asst. DA's in the county courts agree with a defense attorney that, say, an assault case is weak, they don't have a record, or that they can't find a witness to testify," she said. "They reach a plea bargain to knock it down from Class A, the most serious, or Class B, to Class C, the least serious. The defense attorney then comes to the (JP) n office, pays the $500 fine and the $102 in court costs and the court-at-law dismisses it."
The benefits to the defendant are obvious. A Class C conviction is like paying a traffic ticket and won't negatively affect a person's record as would a Class A or Class B. A Class A misdemeanor charge carries a fine up to $4,000 and a year in jail.
A Class B misdemeanor conviction carries up to $180 days in jail and a $2,000 fine.
A Class C theft charge, for example, involves amounts of less than $100.
The JP staffer said it is unknown how many such plea cases are in the pipeline, but said she had turned away a few attorneys who had negotiated a downgrading of their clients' charges with the Asst. DAs in the county courts-at-law.
"They couldn't believe it," she said. "It's a normal part of their profession. Nobody ever told them that the plea bargain they negotiated for their clients would not be accepted here."
A local attorney who was contacted by El Rrun-Rrun said he was unaware the DA's office has placed a moratorium on negotiating pleas on misdemeanor cases in the courts-at-law until he approached an Asst. DA for one of his clients.
"He told me that it was on hold," he said. "But he wouldn't tell me why. In my client's case, the only witness in the case might have left the area and can't be found, so it would be next to impossible to try the case. Now I know. We'll have to go to trial. It doesn't make any fiscal sense."
Since the email was directed from Garza to the JP staffs and not to the office holder, it has raised a lot of eyebrows among the elected officials. Can an Asst. District Attorney tell the staff of an elected official what cases to process? And why direct the email to the staff?
Several sources say that there is an undercurrent of personal vendetta fueling the Garza moratorium on downgraded misdemeanor cases going fro county courts-at-law. They say that what triggered Garza's email was learning that JP 2-2 Johnathan Gracia had negotiated a plea for one of his clients to a Class C misdemeanor. Although Gracia did not go to his JP court to pay the $500 fine, the sources said it irked Garza to no end.
"Right after that Garza issued the email to the JP courts," said a county court-at-law staffer. "It was pretty obvious why he was doing it."
Although the attorney ho negotiated a misdemeanor to a Class C does not know when Garza will terminate the freeze on misdemeanor pleas, he said the personal nature of the motive has angered many of his fellow attorneys.
"It's pretty obvious why Rene did this and it's throwing a wrench in the works," he said. "There are people being affected by this through no fault of their own. The county courts-at-law are going to get backlogged in no time and the judges are going to want to know why. If Rene wasn't liked before, he's going to be liked even less now."