Sentencing for Eliseo Rojas, one of the men accused of killing
Ralph Santos, was postponed for the second time Wednesday because
attorneys couldn’t agree on one of the terms of Rojas’ plea
agreement. The hold up could result in killing the deal entirely if
the wrinkles can’t be smoothed out, according to the judge
presiding over the case.
Hollister – Sentencing for Eliseo Rojas, one of the men accused of killing Ralph Santos, was postponed for the second time Wednesday because attorneys couldn’t agree on one of the terms of Rojas’ plea agreement. The hold up could result in killing the deal entirely if the wrinkles can’t be smoothed out, according to the judge presiding over the case.
“I think this is an important enough case to have it resolved without having a dispute,” San Benito County Superior Court Judge Harry Tobias said. “If it means the entire agreement is vacated if parties can’t agree and start over, I would expect that also. I hate having family members be in this turmoil all the time over what’s happened with this case.”
Rojas will return to court in two weeks, and a new judge will oversee the proceedings and render a sentence. The Santos family believes the change in judges also could leave an opening for the plea bargain to be thrown out completely and the case put to trial.
Minutes before Rojas was to be sentenced an argument arose between lawyers in the judges’ chambers over whether he pleaded guilty to a hate crime enhancement or a substantive crime in his voluntary manslaughter plea. An enhancement is additional penalties connected to another crime, while a substantive crime stands alone as a separate offense. Pleading guilty to the enhancement would mean the difference between a maximum sentence of 11 years, eight months in prison or 14 years. Tobias said District Attorney John Sarsfield understood the enhancement was included, while Rojas’ attorney, Bud Landreth, believed it wasn’t.
Tobias continued sentencing Rojas until the attorneys could hash out an agreement, or if need be, toss the plea out completely and come up with an alternative.
Landreth wasn’t fazed by the continuation and doesn’t believe the plea will be dismissed. He also lamented drawing out the case for the family’s sake, but said those involved want to be sure every detail is adhered to.
“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,” he said. “It’s something that shouldn’t have happened – now we have to work out the kinks.”
Santos’ family members were waiting to voice their aversion to the plea bargain that was agreed to several months ago. Rojas’ guilty plea to voluntary manslaughter, which was reduced from first degree murder, requires he waive his rights to an appeal and testify against Eusebio Rios-Ramos, who is also charged with killing Santos.
The family’s attorney, Arthur Cantu, filed a motion to overturn the plea agreement in November, claiming Sarsfield violated the Victim’s Bill of Rights when orchestrating the deal because he didn’t properly notify the family. Sarsfield denied stonewalling the family and has said he understands their anger but believes it is misplaced. A judge denied Cantu’s motion last month. However, Tobias said Wednesday that when Rojas is sentenced in two weeks, the family will have a chance to try to convince Judge Steven Sanders to throw out the agreement.
“If case law gives the authority I would have to consider it,” Tobias said. “But it doesn’t mean it has to be done.”
Sanders will review the plea and sentence Rojas in two weeks. Cantu was ecstatic about the continuation because he believes it could result in the plea being dismissed all together.
“This is a total and complete victory for us. This is really big,” Cantu said. “An opportunity has been reborn. We’re not giving up hope.”
Santos’ body was found stabbed and strangled in a mustard seed field off Buena Vista Road in June of 2003. Sarsfield has said that Rojas and Rios-Ramos killed Santos because he propositioned them for sex, but the family strongly disagrees with this theory and believes the men fabricated the story as a way to escape harsh prosecution. The family was enraged when Rojas’ deal was struck, and believes it was orchestrated by Sarsfield and Landreth because the two men are friends. Both lawyers adamantly deny the allegations.
Landreth has said he was only doing his job in trying to get the best possible outcome for his client, and Sarsfield has 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 two confessions wouldn’t hold up in court because a judge ruled the men were not properly informed of their Miranda rights.
However, the family believes there was a mountain of evidence to convict both men of first degree murder.
Rios-Ramos’ attorney, Arlene Allan, offered the district attorney’s office a deal almost identical to Rojas’ agreement in early January, but Cantu said Wednesday that Deputy District Attorney Steven Wagner told him he was ready to take the case to trial and not accept a plea offer.
Wagner quickly left the court house Wednesday and said he didn’t have time to comment on the case. He did not return phone calls to his office.
“He assured us he doesn’t want a plea bargain,” Cantu said. “We’re going to hold him to that promise.”
Erin Musgrave covers public safety for the Free Lance. Reach her at 637-5566, ext. 336 or [email protected]
