Thursday, February 25, 2010

Orange County deputy accused of domestic violence

Orlando Sentinel (2/24/10): Ex-boyfriend accuses Orange deputy of domestic violence

While it is always distressing to see a member of law enforcement allegedly engaging in domestic violence, the story told by Deputy Bryan Villella's ex-wife and subsequent partner are frighteningly similar.

What is most concerning is that the judge in this case, Judge Sally Kest, read this injunction request and despite there being a prior history, use of a weapon and physical violence, she merely granted a hearing, without an accompanying temporary injunction. I have been told that the victim is terrified and is currently in hiding.

In his petition dated 2/18, Mr. Carrion alleged that during their 4 year relationship, Deputy Villella battered him numerous times, held a gun to his head while forcing him to clean up his own blood, tased him, coerced him into group sex, dislocated his shoulder, threatened to kill him and his daughter, and threw him out of the home.

And Judge Kest set the case for a hearing on March 2nd WITHOUT granting a temporary injunction?

It appears as though there is a bias of some sort at work here.

Because it is a same sex relationship? Or because it involves a member of law enforcement? Or perhaps because the petition did not allege exact dates and times of the incidents, but was submitted as nearly 7 pages in a narrative fashion, rather than in a more orderly fashion? Judge Kest's response:
The Court finds that the facts, as stated in the Petition alone and without a hearing on the matter, do not demonstrate that Petitioner is a victim of domestic or repeat violence or that Petitioner has reasonable cause to believe that he or she is in imminent danger of becoming a victim of domestic violence. Therefore, there is not a sufficient factual basis upon which the court can enter a Temporary Injunction for Protection Against Domestic or Repeat Violence prior to a hearing. . . . Petitioner may amend or supplement the Petition at any time to state further reasons why a Temporary Injunction should be ordered which would be in effect until the hearing scheduled below.
Mr. Carrion submitted a supplemental affadavit on 2/22 to his petition in an effort to secure a temporary injunction pending his hearing. It was trimmed to 2 pages and included dates of some of the offenses, the most recent one being May, 2009. It was denied. I would assume because it has been several months since the last physical act of violence.

While it has been 8-9 months since he was physically attacked, the Petitioner wrote that he is terrified because Deputy Villella's conduct is finally being investigated by the Orange County Sheriff's Office as a result of an unrelated incident in June 2009 (see Sentinel story). And Deputy Villella knows about Mr. Carrion's attempt to get an injunction - something that could result in Villella losing his job.

Mr. Carrion is wise to remain in hiding.

It is more than disappointing that his allegations, when presented to OCSO last year, were not thoroughly investigated. Mr. Carrion wrote "I cannot count on the police. I went to them for help and got nothing but a reprimand for shaming one of their 'valiant.' After all I told them and proved to them, Bryan was given an award....He is Deputy of the Year.....I am terrified."

And Judge Kest found that Mr. Carrion didn't demonstrate that he had reasonable cause to believe that he was in imminent danger?

Mr. Carrion is very wise to remain in hiding.

Monday, February 22, 2010

Whatever Happened to . . . ? #12

Jose L Torres
Cause Bodily Injury During Felony; Possess Firearm by Convicted Felon; Shooting From Vehicle w/in 1000' of a Person; Leave Scene of Accident w/Injuries
Defendant was charged with striking 2 children with his car as they were playing along the street and subsequently attempting to shoot their father after he confronted the defendant about the accident.
Defendant pled no contest and was adjudicated guilty to all four counts.  He was sentenced to 10 years (minimum mandatory sentence) in prison.

David Padilla-Rivera
Kidnap w/Intent to Commit Felony; Aggravated Assault w/Deadly Weapon; Sexual Battery w/Deadly Weapon; Battery.
Defendant was charged with the assault of a 16-yr old girl on the grounds of the Englewood Neighborhood Center as she walked home from a party at 5:00am.
Defendant was found guilty by a jury of False Imprisonment, Attempted Sexual Battery and Assault. He was sentenced to 5 years in prison + 2 years probation, designated as a sex offender, ordered to not return to the scene of the offense, and to have no contact with the victim.

Terrell Rivers
Robbery w/Firearm; Use of Child in Sexual Performance; Extortion
Defendant was found guilty by a jury of the first two charges and not guilty of the third. He was sentenced to LIFE in the Department of Corrections and designated as a sexual predator.

Glenard Williams
2nd Degree Murder
Defendant was charged with attacking his female roommate 9 times with a hatchet and claimed he blacked out.
Defendant pled guilty and was sentenced to 35 years in prison.

Sunday, February 21, 2010

"He's 40 - She's 17!"

James Gilbert
Solicitation of Minor via Computer (10 counts)
Click here for previous CourtWatcher blogs on this case.

Gilbert and his attorney, Neal McShane, were back in court on Friday, scheduled for yet another Motion to Dismiss.  Mr. McShane vigorously tried to convince Judge Lubet for the umpteenth time that the text messages sent to the defendant by the victim (who was 17 at the time) should be retrieved and be admissable at trial.

Mr. McShane wanted the judge to allow his computer expert to examine the victim's parents' home computer where the mother allegedly viewed the messages on their cell phone provider's website. The issue of invasion of privacy was discussed at length.

After listening to the attorneys argue, at times quite heatedly, whether or not the messages could (1) even be retrieved after nearly two years, and (2) even be admissable at trial, Judge Lubet denied McShane's motion. The judge, for the umpteenth time, told Mr. McShane that her texts to the defendant are not relevant because, as he emphatically stated, "He's 40, she's 17! It's still illegal!"

Judge Lubet would not permit a fishing expedition at the expense of the victim's family. He refused to impose sanctions (as requested by defense counsel) on the State for their lack of technical expertise in retrieving her texts when the charges came to light in 2008. As unfair as it might seem to some, because the victim was a minor, anything she wrote to Mr. Gilbert is not admissable at trial.

As the hearing reached the 60 minute mark, Judge Lubet asked Mr. McShane what his client was going to do - go to trial Monday or plead to the charges. When he replied that Mr. Gilbert hadn't decided yet, the judge informed him that "inaction results in other people making decisions for you." It was very clear that there would be no more delays.

Mr. Gilbert and his attorney went out to the hallway to discuss his options.

After taking about an hour while other matters were handled, the defendant returned to the courtroom to enter a plea of "no contest" to all 10 charges (each one could be punishable by up to 5 years in prison). There was no agreement with the State. Judge Lubet did indicate he would be willing to grant a bond for Mr. Gilbert while the case was appealed.

Sentencing was scheduled for April 19th at 1:30pm to give the Department of Corrections time to prepare a pre-sentence investigation.

Gilbert's fate will then rest with the judge.

Friday, February 19, 2010

Injunction Denied to Victim of Stalking - Stalker/Arsonist Granted Bond

With all the media attention focused on Judge Moxley's denial of an injunction request by Alissa Blanton and her subsequent murder earlier this month, I monitored a criminal case in Judge Marc Lubet's courtroom today that is equally frightening.

On December 1, 2009 19-yr old Tameka Hibbler requested an Injunction for Protection Against Domestic Violence against her ex-boyfriend, Tommy Lee Knight. Her petition noted five different instances of stalking behavior during the previous 4 days:
11/27/09: At her place of work, Mr. Knight was there from 7:00-9:45pm, crying and making a scene. He refused to leave after she asked him to leave her alone.

11/28/09: At the home she shares with her mother and 16-yr old brother, Mr. Knight repeatedly knocked and yelled  at the front door from 11:45pm until 2:00am.  When the Petitioner opened the door, he grabbed her by the arm and insisted she listen to him. He left after her mother threatened to call the police. Ms. Hibbler indicated that for the prior two days he had been repeatedly called her personal, as well as employer's, phone.

11/29/09: Mr. Knight followed her to her church and refused to leave her alone. She asked him to sit in another location, but he refused.

11/30/09: Mr. Knight waited at her place of employment for her to appear. Petitioner's co-workers advised her that he was there from 10:30am until 1:00pm.

11/30/09: Mr. Knight followed Petitioner to her friend's apartment and watched them from the bushes at the apartment complex. Her friend called the police to report Mr. Knight's behavior because they were concerned he might harm one or both of them.
On 12/1/09, Judge Theotis Bronson denied Ms. Hibbler's petition, stating "the allegations are not sufficient for a domestic violence injunction." They certainly seem sufficient to CourtWatch. Actual physical assault is not the sole thing that can be considered when deciding whether or not to grant an injunction.

Click here for the Statute definition of stalking and tell me if you don't think the above allegations support a temporary injunction and a hearing.

It should be noted that Mr. Knight lived in the Petitioner's home with her mother and brother after his parents kicked him out of their home. Mr. Knight is 22-years old.

Mr. Knight was in Judge Lubet's courtroom today for a Bond Hearing.

The charges?

Arson 1st Degree of Dwelling/Building w/People Present (a felony) & Stalking (a misdemeanor).

Mr. Knight allegedly doused the doors and windows of the victims' home with gasoline and ignited a blaze at approximately 4:00am on December 2, 2009 - the day after Ms. Hibbler's injunction was denied.

Earlier that evening, some neighbors alerted the family to the defendant's presence in the neighborhood. His bike was seen nearby. The main breaker to their home had been turned off. According to the mother's testimony, the Orange County Sheriff's Department said there was nothing they could do unless someone witnessed a criminal act. This was not the first time they heard that from law enforcement.

Thankfully, Ms. Hibbler's younger brother was unable to sleep as a result of the events earlier in the day, heard and saw the defendant through the front door peephole with a gas can, and got the family out of the house safely when he realized it was on fire.

All three family members testified today that they are terrified that Mr. Knight will return to "finish the job" if he gets out of jail. The defendant's family and friends are allegedly pressuring the victim to drop the charges against him.

Judge Lubet commented that he was surprised that the State Attorney's Office had not filed 3 counts of Attempted Murder charges against Mr. Knight. Assistant State Attorney Shannon Corack indicated that it was being reviewed for possible upgrade. Had that been done, Judge Lubet indicated he probably would not have granted a bond at the hearing today. However, because Arson and Stalking are both bondable offenses, he was obligated to set a bond and conditions of release that accomplish two things:
  1. Ensure the saftey of the community, particularly the victims.
  2. Ensure the defendant's presence in court.
Considering the fact that Mr. Knight scores 46 months as a minimum in the Department of Corrections, with a maximum of 30 years, it is entirely possible that he would be tempted to flee. He has demonstrated by two earlier Violation of Probation charges that he has a problem with complying with court orders.

Ultimately a bond in the amount of $26,000 was set with the following conditions of release:
  • Ankle monitor
  • Home confinement - may only leave home go to work, school, meet with his attorney, or seek medical attention
  • No contact with any of the victims - either directly or indirectly
  • Stay 1000 feet away from the victims' home
  • Possess no weapons or firearms
  • Possess no flammable liquids
At this time, the family is in a confidential location. But my gut tells me they are far from safe, even with the conditions placed upon the defendant if he does manage to make bond.

Monday, February 15, 2010

Update: Child Killer Gets 18 Month Sentence

As promised earlier this week when posting about this case, here is (as Paul Harvey would say) the rest of the story.
In speaking with Anna Valentini, the prosecutor who handled the case, I learned the following:

With the exception of a quick errand run when she left the home, Brian del Pino and his girlfriend had spent the entire day with 18-month old Cameron Andrews together. It was during her absence that little Cameron sustained the injuries that ultimately killed him.

Del Pino reportedly sought immediate medical attention for the boy, and was attempting to resuscitate him when emergency personnel arrived. The Defense was prepared to call two expert witnesses who would testify that the child's injuries were consistent with del Pino's version of events, wherein the child was injured accidentally, thus creating the potential for reasonable doubt in the minds of prospective jurors.

The mother and both grandmothers were present at the sentencing hearing earlier this month.

Finally, the defendant walked the straight and narrow for nearly 4 years while out on bond as he awaited trial.

As previously reported, del Pino will serve 10 years of probation after his release from custody, and is therefore subject to a potentially much lengthier period of incarceration if he fails to abide by those requirements.

Given the circumstances, particularly that he made every effort to save the child (unlike many defendants we see), CourtWatch believes the plea agreement was a good one.

A Black Hole in the Court System?

Early in my courtwatching career I recall an Assistant State Attorney admitting in open court that sometimes cases fall into a "black hole" in their office. I periodically follow up with the State about cases that seem to be languishing. Whether or not my emails jog things loose is anybody's guess.

However, among the several cases that appear to be forgotten, I found two defendants who have been in custody for several months. There are no upcoming dates noted in the Clerk's records either.

Albert Koenig
Defendant was arrested 8/9/09 for Aggravated Battery, False Imprisonment & Battery. Defendant is still in custody.

Koenig was scheduled for trial 1/7/10. Jail records show there are no other holds.

A hearing was held 12/9/09 as a result of the following request by the defendant to Judge Wattles:

Hello. My name is Albert William Koenig. I am writing you in reference to case 2009-CF-011725 scheduled for pretrial on 12/3/09. I would like to request a change of my plea from not guilty to guilty. I am guilty of striking Ms. G and do not wish to tie-up your [sic] or the court's time with trying to avoid prosecution of a crime I committed.  I fully understand that I can be sentenced to up to 20 years in prison and am fully prepared to accept any judgement you see fit. i do wish to express great remorse for my actions and wish to seek help with controlling my anger management. I hope you approve my request.

Koenig subsequently withdrew his request in open court on 12/9/09. His case was docketed for 1/7/10, but there is no record of it having been called that day, nor of it having been rescheduled.

Toby Jeffrey Ruhl
Ruhl was arrested 6/1/09 and has been in custody since then for Burglary of a Structure.

Ruhl's trial date of 1/11/10 has come and gone with no disposition noted on the Clerk's site either. Jail records indicate there is a hold on him (source is undisclosed on their website).

Mr. Ruhl also wrote to the judge in his case as follows (dated 12/28/09):

Dear Honorable Judge LeBlanc:
I am writing to you to request a Neilson [sic] Hearing.* My reason for requesting this hearing is as follows:
1. I have a conflict with the OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER
2. The LAWYER assigned to represent me has refused to put together a case with reasonable diligence.
3. I have had inadequate representation not only now, but five times prior in other cases in my past:
     a) 1988 – resulting in 30 months in prison
     b) 1991 – resulting in 24 months in prison
     c) 1992 – resulting in 24 months in prison
     d) 1992 – violation of parole – resulting in 8 years prison
     e) 1997 – resulting in 18 months prison
4. My point is, I request a outside law firm to represent me NOW. I do not have any degree of hope that the Office of the PUBLIC DEFENDER will give me the degree of representation the law states that my right as a Citizen of the United States deserve.
5. Honorable Judge LeBlanc, I need help for once NOT MORE JAIL!
                                                      Signed, Toby Ruhl

*A Nelson Hearing is conducted when a defendant alleges their attorney has not competently represented them.

On 9/8/09, Mr. Ruhl waived his right to a speedy trial because the defense was not sufficiently prepared for trial.
On 11/12/09, Mr. Ruhl rejected the State's plea offer.
On 11/19/09, a joint motion for continuance (both Defense & State agreed) was granted.
On 12/28/09, this motion for Nelson Hearing was recorded. Court records show no Nelson Hearing was scheduled or conducted.
The case was set for trial 1/11/10 but never made it on the docket. No result is noted in court records.

Mr. Ruhl obviously has an extensive criminal history. A check of the Department of Corrections website shows prison sentences dating back to 1986 in Franklin, Leon and Orange Counties. But does that mean his request for a Nelson Hearing should go unheeded?

In the words of British Prime Minister William Gladstone (1809-1898), "Justice delayed, is justice denied."

I think we can do better in both cases.

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Child Killer Gets 18 Months in Prison

Brian del Pino (age at time of offense, 21 yrs), was sentenced last week to 18 months (not years, months) in the Department of Corrections for the 2006 manslaughter death of his girlfriend's 22 month old son, Cameron Andrews. He also agreed to serve 10 years probation and take both anger management and parenting classes.

Eighteen months prison for killing a toddler?

I attempted to contact the Seminole County Assistant State Attorney who handled the case, Anna Valentini, to ask her what the circumstances surrounding the plea negotiations were in this case. Sometimes, plea agreements are the best the State can do when victims are unwilling to testify against their perpetrator. Sometimes the other evidence is not very strong and a jury could easily find reasonable doubt as to the defendant's guilt. When I know more about the particulars in del Pino's case, I will post an update.

Just for comparison, here are the dispositions of others in our community who were charged in the deaths of children since 2007.

Victim: Presayis Skawski (3 months)
Defendant: Heriberto Ayala (member of family)
Offense Date: 5/4/07
Orange County case 2007CF012311: Pled to Aggravated Manslaughter of Child
Sentenced to 25 years in prison.

Victim: Brady Willow (1 year)
Defendant: Benedict Krawczak (mother's boyfriend)
Offense Date: 5/13/07
Orange County case 2007CF007321: Pled to 2nd Degree Murder
Sentenced to 28 years prison + 5 years probation. More info here.

Victim: Samiyah Gammons (2 months)
Defendant: Ventrel "Maurice" Gammons (father)
Offense Date: 5/17/07
Seminole County case 2007CF005849: Jury verdict - guilty of 1st Degree Murder and Aggravated Child Abuse.
Sentenced to LIFE in prison.

Victim: Damian Pickett (infant)
Defendant: William Randolph Pickett II (father)
Offense Date: 7/31/07
Orange County case 2007CF015174: Pled to Manslaughter w/Weapon
Sentenced to 111 months prison

Victim: Levares Key (age 8)
Defendant: Tangela Key (mother)
Offense Date: 9/29/07
Orange County case 2007CF14975: Pled to Neglect of Child Causing Great Harm
Sentenced to 1 year jail + 10 years probation. More info here.

Victim: Amber Shevalier (1 year)
Co-defendants: Kelly Lorraine Shevalier (mother) & Michael Alan Barker (mother's boyfriend)
Offense Date: 1/4/08
Orange County case 2008CF000179 (Shevalier) & 2008CF000159 (Barker)
Barker pled to 2nd Degree Murder and was sentenced to 25 years prison.
Shevalier pled to Neglect of Child got 3 years probation. Shevalier photo not currently available

Victim: Jean-Pierre Tillman (6 months)
Defendant: Gregory Tillman (father)
Offense Date: 2/9/08
Orange County case 2008CF001784: Jury found defendant guilty of 1st Degree Murder, Aggravated Child Abuse and Battery.
Sentenced to LIFE in prison. More info here.

Victim: Cameron Palmer (6 yrs)
Defendant: Tony Gonsoulin (uncle)
Offense Date: 7/3/08
Seminole County case 2008CF003416: Pled to 2nd degree murder
Sentenced to 20 years in prison.

Victim: Kenny Penaloza-Torres (21 months)
Defendant: Edwin Gabriel Ramos (mother's boyfriend)
Offense Date: 9/10/08
Orange County case 2008CF013887: Pled to 2nd degree murder
Sentenced to 30 years in prison + 20 years probation.

Victim: Ashley Diaz (4 months)
Defendant: Katie Furtaw (mother)
Offense Date: 8/11/09
Orange County case 2009CF012414: Charges dropped
More info here.

Several cases are still working their way through the system. For a complete list, click here.

Friday, February 12, 2010

Whatever Happened to . . . ? #11

Tony Cordera
1st Degree Murder
Defendant was tried and convicted for the 2005 blunt force trauma murder of his estranged girlfriend, Jaime Mailander. Ms. Mailander was assaulted and killed when she went to their mutual home to take her belongings. Defendant attempted suicide at the time. Cordera was sentenced to LIFE in the Department of Corrections earlier this month. Photo at left was taken in 2005, photo at right was taken at DOC this month.

Emilio Pinto
2nd Degree Murder
Defendant pled to stabbing his girlfriend, Nelly Santiago, to death in 2008.  He was sentenced to LIFE in the Department of Corrections.

Charlie Anthony Jackson
Felony Battery Great Bodily Harm; Battery
Defendant pled and was adjudicated guilty of the assault on his wife detailed in this blog. He was sentenced to 5 years probation to be supervised by the State Department of Corrections.

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

"Order Setting Hearing" (OSH) Endangers Lives

by Carol Wick, CEO of Harbor House

Monday's murder-suicide was tragic on so many levels. One that truly strikes home is that Alissa Blanton was not granted an emergency injunction when she requested it. Instead of denying the injunction, the judge issued an “Order Setting Hearing.” This is a process where a judge, who does not feel that there is enough information to give an injunction, sets a hearing date for both parties to appear, plead their cases and then decides whether or not an injunction should be granted.

What is the concern?

In these cases, an already terrified victim is left legally unprotected for 14 days while their alleged perpetrator, be it a stalker or batterer, is given not only notification about their action to end the relationship, but has14 days to continue the behavior that caused the victim to seek the injunction in the first place. The most dangerous period for a victim is when they attempt to end the relationship. An injunction is frequently the perpetrator's first notice that such a decision has been reached.

Harbor House survivors have reported coming home (if they live together the abuser would still be allowed to live in the home during the 14 days) and being beaten because the OSH had been served. This is extremely dangerous and, as we saw on Monday, often deadly practice that need not ever happen.

What could be done differently?

Harbor House has repeatedly requested that judges either grant or deny injunctions but to never choose OSH because of the vulnerability of the victim. When an injunction is denied, the batterer is unaware of the action and the victim can then amend and resubmit their petition. The practice of OSH became such a serious concern in Orange County that Harbor House began tracking the outcomes of cases based on how high the victim’s score was on the danger assessment (which tells us how likely they are to be killed). Ideally, we would like to see those scoring low on the assessment (although that is not a guarantee of safety) as the ones denied and those scoring high as the ones granted.

For various reasons, judges often have no choice but to dismiss because a form is filled out incorrectly or not completely or there really is no legal basis for the injunction. Removing those situations, we would like to see about an 85-95% granted rate on highly dangerous cases. Due to the specialized domestic court here in Orange County, our judges are some of the best in the state at identifying what is really serious and what may not be. There is still room for improvement. Below is our latest report on how cases are doing here in Orange County. You be the judge.

As you can see in the table (left), sixty-three petitioners who were assessed by Harbor House as having a high likelihood of being killed or severely injured had their injunctions denied. Twenty-nine had an Order Setting Hearing where the batterer was notified of their action and they were left without protection. It is important to be aware of this practice, the danger in which it puts the victim, and that it is easily preventable.

WFTV has a copy of the petition for injunction available here.

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Stalking - it's not harmless

Yesterday's murder-suicide of Alissa Blanton at the hands of her stalker at the AT&T Call Center in Orlando is a grim reminder of how deadly someone's obsession can become.

It's also a wake-up call to employers about how necessary it is for them to have protocols in place for employees who are being victimized in this manner.

It is crucial that victims notify their neighbors, employers, childrens' schools, and any other places they frequent (their place of worship, their gym, etc) of their situation. If more people know about the perpetrator - recognize him/her and their vehicle - and are willing to call law enforcement, the chances are better that the criminal justice system will be able to intervene.

Stalking victims usually know their perpetrator.  Whether they were ever romantically involved with their victim or not should not minimize the perpetrator's behavior in how we treat the case.

Stalking is not harmless.

For more information about stalking, visit the National Stalking Awareness Month website.   

To view WKMG's coverage of the story, click here.

For other stalking cases we've blogged about, click here.

Saturday, February 6, 2010

The Super Bowl and Domestic Violence

If you google these words, you'll get all sorts of differing opinions about whether or not the Big Game causes an increase in domestic violence incidents. Here are just a few that I found:

KTAL Super Bowl Sunday and Domestic Violence
WRAL Does Domestic Violence Increase During the Super Bowl?
PsychCentral Super Bowl Sunday, Domestic Violence & Your Health
Snopes Super Bull Sunday

What the news reports and other bloggers fail to emphasize is that the underlying reason that domestic violence incidents occur is because one person believes they have the right to control their partner and/or treat them like they are not deserving of respect. And they exert the power they believe necessary to achieve that control.

Financial problems, job loss, alcohol & drug abuse, and other stressors can exacerbate a situation. But they are not responsible for violence.

We all make choices in life. Whether we choose to verbally or physically assault our family is a choice we make every time we interact with them.

Here's hoping that every day, not just Super Bowl Sunday, we make good choices.

PS: Go Redskins!  ;)

Thursday, February 4, 2010

Whatever Happened to . . . ? #10

Robert Chester Double Jr.
Lewd/Lascivious Conduct
Defendant was charged with groping some girls in the wave pool at Typhoon Lagoon.
Pled guilty, adjudication was withheld. Sentenced to 4 days jail with credit for 4 days time served; 5 years sex offender probation; no contact with victim; no unsupervised contact with children under 18 years old; no return to water parks or museums. Defendant may transfer probation to New York.

Quentin O'Kelly Lee
Aggravated Battery Great Bodily Harm
Defendant grabbed a woman by the neck and used a roofing knife to slash her fingers because she refused to have sex with him.
Pled no contest, adjudicated guilty and sentenced to 3 years in Department of Corrections to be followed by 2 years probation; undergo psycho/sexual evaluation and treatment; have no contact with the victim; complete anger management class; and submit to random urinalysis testing.

Faustino A Santiago
Sexual Battery Child<12yrs old; Lewd/Lascivious Molestation Victim<16yrs; Lewd/Lascivious Conduct; Battery on Detention Facility Employee
Jury verdict acquitted defendant of the first charge but convicted him of the remaining three charges. Judge Rand Wallis sentenced defendant to LIFE in Department of Corrections on count 2 plus 30 years consecutive plus another 30 years consecutive for counts 3 & 4.