After weighing the merits of dueling arguments by lawyer Arthur
Cantu and District Attorney John Sarsfield on Wednesday, a judge
denied Cantu’s motion to throw out a plea agreement for Eliseo
Rojas, convicted killer of Ralph Santos.
Hollister – After weighing the merits of dueling arguments by lawyer Arthur Cantu and District Attorney John Sarsfield on Wednesday, a judge denied Cantu’s motion to throw out a plea agreement for Eliseo Rojas, convicted killer of Ralph Santos.
In front of more than 30 of Santos’ relatives, San Benito County Superior Court Judge Harry Tobias said the case law Cantu cited in his motion didn’t warrant throwing out the plea. The family wasn’t in court when the deal was struck in November, and they filed a motion to set aside the plea so they could voice their concerns about the agreement before Rojas’ sentencing. Rojas pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter in the killing of Santos, whose body was found in a mustard seed field off Buena Vista Road in 2003.
“All of the points of authorities indicate the time for considering the effect of the plea is at the time of sentencing,” Tobias said. “Family members’… concerns will be properly addressed at the time of sentencing, but not at this point in time.”
Sarsfield said he wasn’t surprised the judge ruled in his favor and considered the day’s events a “complete and total victory.”
“There was no basis in law for Mr. Cantu’s motion and that’s exactly what Judge Tobias said,” Sarsfield said.
Cantu, who has had an ongoing feud with Sarsfield since he lost the district attorney’s race to the prosecutor in 2002, said he didn’t consider Wednesday’s ruling a loss because he believes his actions were just.
“We needed to let the judge and the community know what was done was an injustice. We needed the court to know we were not happy,” Cantu said. “It’s too bad the first time our lead prosecutor shows up in court, he’s arguing on behalf of someone who committed a homicide.”
Sarsfield said this was not the first time he argued a case, but that he goes from time to time if one of his deputies is sick or there’s some other extenuating circumstance. Cantu’s comment that he was arguing for the defense was “absolutely inaccurate, and nothing more than an example of the inflammatory rhetoric that Mr. Cantu uses,” Sarsfield said.
“I thought it was important enough that I be there. If Mr. Cantu was allowed to intervene in a criminal case my belief was he would do it again and again, and I wanted to make sure that didn’t happen,” he said. “It would have had statewide implications if Mr. Cantu had been successful.”
Cantu’s motion, which he filed in November, claimed Sarsfield violated the Victim’s Bill of Rights when orchestrating the deal because he didn’t properly notify the family, and that it was struck because Sarsfield and Rojas’ attorney, Bud Landreth are friends. Landreth and Sarsfield both denied any allegations of cronyism.
Sarsfield said in court that he understood the family was upset with the plea but that his deputy district attorney, Steven Wagner, told them about a possible plea agreement before it was solidified and the family expressed their concerns then. However, Sarsfield said he agreed to the plea because two key pieces of evidence were questionable and could result in an acquittal if the case went to trial. Santos’ remains were so badly decomposed the coroner could never determine the cause of death. Sarsfield also worried that the men’s confessions wouldn’t hold up in court because a judge ruled the men were not properly informed of their Miranda rights.
Although Rojas was scheduled for sentencing Wednesday, Tobias continued the hearing until Feb. 9 at 1:30pm so attorneys can look over a sentencing report issued by the San Benito County Probation Department. Family members will be able to voice their opinions about the plea agreement and what they believe is an appropriate sentence on that date. Rojas’ guilty plea to voluntary manslaughter, which was reduced from first-degree murder, can send him to prison for a maximum of 11 years and eight months. Under the terms of the bargain, Rojas must testify against Eusebio Rios-Ramos, who is also charged with killing Santos and waive his rights to an appeal.
Santos’ body was found stabbed and strangled in a mustard seed field off Buena Vista Road in 2003. Sarsfield has said the men killed Santos because he propositioned them for sex. The family disagrees with this theory and believes the men fabricated it to escape harsher punishment.
Rios-Ramos’ attorney, Arlene Allan, offered the district attorney’s office a deal almost identical to Rojas’ deal two weeks ago, but Sarsfield said he hasn’t made any decisions yet and that the deal is still very preliminary.
“We’re talking,” he said. Rios-Ramos’ next court date is scheduled for Feb. 23.
If Rios-Ramos goes to trial and is convicted on first-degree murder, he could face life in prison. Allan has said she plans to file a motion for a change of venue if the case goes to trial because she doesn’t believe her client could receive a fair trial in San Benito County.
After the hearing, Lorie Santos, Santos’ daughter, stood outside the courtroom in a state of shock with tears threatening to spill over her red-rimmed eyes.
“I can’t even begin to tell you how tired I am of being hurt – we’re supposed to be the victims,” she said. “We’re not the monsters that did this to our father.”
Phillips Sweet, who represented the family before they hired Cantu, was dismayed at the judge’s ruling.
“I think it sends a clear message in San Benito County that you can strangle a man, confess to it twice, steal his car and the highest sentence you’ll get is manslaughter,” Sweet said.
Erin Musgrave covers public safety for the Free Lance. Reach her at 637-5566, ext. 336 or [email protected]
