 |
 |
Mitch Carlson, 17, enters Sonoma County Juvenile Justice Center on Wednesday. JEFF KAN LEE/PD
By PAUL PAYNE
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
A manslaughter charge could be forthcoming against a 17-year-old Cloverdale driver who struck a pedestrian but was allowed to plead to felony hit-and-run in the days before the victim died, a special prosecutor said Wednesday.
Mitch Carlson, who hit and killed longtime resident Miguel Sanchez, 83, in the Dec. 27 crash, could receive the additional charge at a disposition hearing continued to Feb. 9, said Murat Ozgur, a Marin County prosecutor assigned to conduct an independent review of the case.
Ozgur said the new charge would reflect Sanchez’s death on Dec. 31 and would be based in part on new evidence revealed Tuesday by the ongoing investigation.
Ozgur would not say whether the new charge would be a felony or misdemeanor. However, he said a manslaughter charge appears justified.
“The pleadings did not capture the actual crime,” he said.
Ozgur would not describe the evidence but those familiar with the case said outside court that investigators were looking into the possibility that Carlson was using a cell phone at the time of the crash.
“We’re pleased it’s being looked into more thoroughly,” said the victim’s son, Michael Sanchez. “It got off to a jump start so it’s good to see it slow down a little.”
Carlson, a Cloverdale High School student and basketball player, appeared with family members before Judge Raima Ballinger. The proceedings were closed to the public because the case involves a minor.
The family declined to be interviewed as they left the building.
“We’re not making any comment at this time,” said Carlson’s lawyer, Joe Passalacqua.
The case erupted in controversy after Sanchez family members complained it had been settled within days, before Miguel Sanchez died and without the benefit of a completed crash report from Cloverdale police.
Neither outgoing district attorney Stephan Passalacqua, who left office Jan. 3 after two terms, nor his successor, Jill Ravitch, have offered an explanation.
Ravitch has said only that there was some kind of miscommunication. She has since called for an independent investigation that is being overseen by the state Attorney General.
Stephan Passalacqua, brother of the defense attorney, denied any involvement in the case.
Ozgur, who was appointed to determine whether the initial hit-and-run charge was appropriate, said he is still looking into details of the case. An investigator from his Marin office, Michael McBride, is assisting in the review. Also, Cloverdale police are completing their crash investigation, Ozgur said.
Subscribe by Email
Follow us on Twitter
Kaitlyn Dunaway and Mitch Carlson
What do they have in common? They both killed someone with their car while on their cell phone.
Kaitlyn killed a 2 year old, but stopped at the scene of the crime.
Mitch killed a senior and left him there bleeding because he was late for his pratice.
How can Mitch just get probation and Kaitlyn face harsher sentencing?
Is the life of a senior less than a life of a child?
Both are people and are so valuable and can never be replaced.
My condolences to Both Families for their loss and injuries. Both are so heartfelt and you think kids would learn DO NOT DRIVE AND USE A CELL PHONE!
Whatever charges and sentencing Kaitlyn faces should be simliar to what Mitch should face.
If that boy was black or brown, there would be no story. He would still be in jail unless he made bail. The good ol’ boy thing is alive and well in Sonoma County, just no southern twang.
Dear Grame Wellington,
you are wrong again. The problem with this case is how the new DA’s #2 person dealt with the aftermath. The law allows you to file more charges AFTER someone dies, even if the case was over BEFORE someone dies. The appeals court will NOT overturn this. A County was on the news last week saying they were filing murder charges after 8 or more years because the victim finally died from complications from the original case and the guy pled to charges in the original case!
Someone who is the self-annointed #2 in the DA’s office should know that. They should not be telling the press that the case is over and there is nothing the DA can do now, and they certainly should not be telling the police to STOP investigating because the guy pled guilty and it would be a “waste of their time.”
Bud McMahon really screwed that up, and the Marin DA saying they will be finally charges proves that. The question here is what is our new DA Jill Ravitch going to do about it. It does not bode well if she is now saying this was a “mis-communication.” This was bad lawyering. Period. Who miscommunicated?
The defense attorney was doing his job and pleading a client out before the guy got worse. That is just smart lawyering. It happens everyday in court even if the DA objects. We do not even know if the da objected? It wouldn’t have mattered anyway, that is the defendant’s right. If the DA was not ready to file charges because they didn’t have all their facts, then they should not have filed charges. They could have waited a few days or a few weeks. Thats the first clue that former DA Passalacqua had nothing to do with this, he could never make a quick decision on what to do that was one of his downfalls.
But how can she say her #2 doesn’t know what he is doing. it reflects very poorly on her and the office. How can an “experienced” DA not know the law.?
The community wants answers.
Justice in sonoma County? Two seperate juries have turned loose people who got into shoot outs with the police. There seems to be a trend where as long as the person in trouble is young he/she is not responsible for their actions.
Maybe John instead of seeing families torn apart by parents trying to get away, we might see parents putting more effort into the children the brought into this world. Too often people leave the problems of discipline of their children to either the public school system or the judicial system. Moral behavior, courtesy, respect and self-responsibility need to start in the home.Yes there are parents that take the time to instill this in their child to no avail. I don’t think this was the case with this young man. I think this was a case of a boy with no true idea of self-responsibility but a misplaced sense of entitlement. He wasn’t born that way, he learned it.
What this kid who ran down a grandfather in the crosswalk and then drove himself on to basketball practice experienced was not “bad luck” It was the result of thoughtlessness, carelessness, entitlement and probably a big does of teen age stupidity. Yes we can all imagine ourselves making similar mistakes that result in tragedy but hopefully we would not try to evade just punishment and hopefully we would find it in ourselves to admit our wrong and to try to atone for the consequences. Accidents can and do happen to everyone but how you deal with your responsibility and culpability is what forms your character.
//It was only bad luck that he killed somebody.//
You don’t think negligent driving might have had something to do with it? Very few “accidents” happen because of bad luck. Usually, someone made a mistake or worse. In this case, a person is dead.
I understand the young man’s fear. It is letting that fear overcome his responsibility to come to the aid of the man he just injured that is the problem.
Fleeing an accident is a crime for a good reason. Your tone is almost, ah shucks, s*** happens.
John Hudson states: “Here we go again criminalizing bad luck and unintended results.”
I was going to stay out of the back and forth forum banter. That statement though cannot go unchallenged.
Bad luck? The killing of a innocent is now considered “bad luck with unintended results”? How dare we criminalize neglect and lack of responsibility that leads to death?
Fear? He left due to fear? So that makes it alright? Looks like he left, as there was basketball practice to attend. Fear came later. Usually happens right around the time someone gets caught for a criminal act. In some way we should feel for the criminal and in some sick way it’s only bad luck for the victim??
Would you be so quick to forgive if it had been your daughter killed? Your son killed? Your wife, your mother, your father?
Argument as John Hudson’s, would lead one to believe you could fire a weapon down a crowded street, with the INTENT of hitting no-one, but out of pure “bad luck” and NO self responsibility, you kill someone, run away, and should be found innocent because you had no INTENT,and you RAN strictly out of fear.
A car used with neglect becomes a 12,000 lb weapon. Ask the approximate 50,000 pedestrians killed since 1993.
Those that argue on behalf of the criminal, would they ever change places with the victim, and hold their same argument?
The sentence does not ruin the life, the act that gets you the sentence ruins your life. Responsibility. Much to be said about that word.
The Truth
Justice for Kody Quinn Williams
We can reduce this whole issue down to “miscommunication” as the article states? Here I thought we had a system that was broke.{facetious} Sounds like a “wipe the slate clean” word to me. Mis-communication. Sounds so innocent.
Can Miguel Sanchez get Justice? Time will tell.
For those of us crying out for justice, for Kody Quinn Williams, another Cloverdale, Ca Hit and Run victim, “Time” has stretched into 2 years.
Much to be said for accountability. On both sides of the law.
I hope everyone works on their speaking skills, before Kody Quinn Williams killer gets to court, because I would hate to see him walk free because you have a mouth full of powdered donuts.
The Truth
http://justiceforkodywilliams.blogspot.com/
Here we go again criminalizing bad luck and unintended results. What this kid did wrong is leave the scene out of fear. It was only bad luck that he killed somebody. Why do we dramatically increase a sentence to the point where it will destroy a young life because of the unintended result? The criminal law is supposed to operate by deterring the intended actions of people making rational decisions.
Disgusted Reader: If parents could be held liable, criminally or civilly, for the acts of their children you would see the parents of kids parents perceive to be dangerous desperately trying to avoid having custody of those kids. Parents would divorce and fight not to have custody.The siblings of the perceived dangerous kids would suffer. Think about it.
Once again proving just how corrupt our judicial and legal systems are, especially in this county.
According to our founders, the sovereign authority in the USA, a democratic republic, is the people. They by their Constitutions tell govt what to do etc.
Well if the people are sovereign, then this kid should claim his sovereign immunity. Remember the sovereign can do no wrong and is empowered by the Almighty. The govt isnt and never was!
And yet corrupt judicial officers, DA,s etc all claim immunity from the law!
Yea- too bad nowadays isn’t it? Is there no way kids can be held responsible for anything? If they are going to be allowed to drive a motor vehicle there needs to be a way to get them to acknowledge the fact that cell phone use while driving is against the law and is a deadly mix. They seem to think they know all they need to know and have fallaciously self proclaimed themselves as their their own little deities that exempts them from very real possibilities (like perhaps killing somebody?). This case and the Rohnert Park case of dead and seriously injured pedestrians while the driver/killer is on a phone should not be given leniancy. Everybody makes mistakes, but this, with this cell phone/texting batch of kids out there needs to stop somehow, and the harshest punishment possible with extensive media coverage might get them to actually think there are other people in the world besides themselves. Life is precious, and they need to understand that and add that into their apparently already full brains. It doesn’t matter if you play sports, or are popular, or are a computer geek. When driving, DRIVE.
Sorry everyone- the party is over. No chance in heck that would survive an appeal. A plea was accepted and the remaining related charges can’t be revived. It is a dead issue. They can try and “file charges” but they would never survive an appeal… here we have a case that the Peo of Ca knew or should have known death was imminent – yet they failed to charge the case properly. Now they want to go back and throw the pitch again after the inning has ended. Sorry never will fly but have fun trying. Stephan cut a great deal for his brother as a parting family gift and got away with”murder” – wow.
It is unbelievable that this young man will walk away with a slap on the wrist. This speaks volumes about our society and today’s youth. More and more we are seeing our young people committing violent and senseless crimes with no concern for the consequences. Why is that? That is because there are little or none. Parents and society both make excuses for their behaviors.Parents will lie for their children and if that doesn’t work, some will buy their way out of whatever mess they have gotten into. The time has come for society as a whole to stand up and say “Enough”. Start holding not only the child but the parent accountable for the crime. If Mommy or Daddy had to part with their hard earned money or had to do “Time” for their child’s crime maybe they won’t be so quick to either blame others or turn a blind eye. I truly hope that this young man is made to understand the value of human life, the pain he has brought to so many and that there are consequences that fit the crime. I hope his parents come to understand that they should have raised their child to be more compassionate and responsible. Since they will not pay for their crime through the criminal court lets hope they pay big in civil court.
I thought Ozgur, from Marin county is supposed to provide a true accounting of this case. We know what the driver did wrong, how about letting the public in on the ‘players’ involved in the other side of this disturbing story
The vehicular manslaughter charge is a misdemeanor. Yes, there is a misdemeanor murder offense in California. The hit and run with injury is a felony. A misdemeanor is an offense punishable by up to one year in County Jail. A felony is punishable by state prison. His conviction depends on what he’s actually sentenced. In juvenile court, none of this makes any difference. The judge can’t sentence him to state prison — he’s a juvenile. If this stays in the juvenile court arena, there’s almost no chance the kid will get any real punishment. After all, the goal of juveniile court is rehabilitation.
So unless the judge sets aside the plea agreement and sends the case to adult court, the new charge is meaningless. The additional charge just may be enough to tip the scales in that direction. We just don’t know all the facts. It appears the judge could not have known all the facts either, so it’s possible she’ll have proper legal justification to move the case out of juvenile court.
I anticipate that absolutely nothing will change and that the judge will enforce the existing plea agreement claiming it’s a binding contract and her hands are tied. That way she can shift the blame back to the District Attorney’s office for striking a bad bargain.
Yes, more blame shifting is on the way. Can’t anyone with some power stand up for justice? Sigh.