|
|
|
Irey removed from 'gastank' caseThis article was originally published in the the Amador Ledger Dispatch on January 7, 2000, and is reproduced here with its permission. State Attorney General now involvedBy Catherine Bowers JACKSON—Several surprises came with Wednesday's hearing to set a trial date on the Robert Womack "gastank" case. Although it did not come as a surprise that the complicated, costly and seemingly endless legal maneuvering of principals in this case has not ceased, the appearance of a whole new prosecution team seemed to catch co-defendants, Robert Womack and Mark Sherrill and Judge John F. Cruikshank off guard. "This is the first I've heard of the change in the prosecution's strategy," said Judge Cruikshank, as he asked the new faces presiding over the prosecution of this case to introduce themselves. Stacey P. Geis, special environmental prosecutor of the California District Attorneys Association (CDAA), G. Lynn Thorpe, state deputy attorney general (overseeing the co-counsel situation), and Brett Morris, also of the CDAA, introduced themselves. "And I understand Mr. Irey will not be handling this matter from here on out?" Cruikshank said. "Correct" was the answer from the prosecution. According to Amador county District Attorney Todd Riebe, Special Prosecutor David Irey, of Stockton, has been taken off the case due to an increase in his workload with the San Joaquin County District Attorney's office and other logistical scheduling conflicts. And although the new special team will be used in the co-counsel prosecution of Robert Womack and Mark Sherrill, "Amador County will continue to have control over these cases," Riebe said. Prosecutors also requested a severance of Sherrill's case from that of Womack, during Wednesday's hearing. Both men are accused of conspiring to commit a crime by allegedly illegally removing a gas tank in May 1998. The request was made in order to proceed with the trial of Sherrill, and his part in the case, while Womack's trial is delayed by appeal. Charges against a third defendant, David Mason, III, have already been dropped. Womack filed opposition to a petition filed by the District Attorney's office to rescind Judge Cruikshank's orders to return papers taken into evidence in a raid of Womack's home in Jan. 1999. These orders were the basis of the District Attorney's appeal to the state court, as well as Womack's appeal for opposition. "There's been no word from those on high?" Cruikshank asked in court on Wednesday. The answer was, "no." Since no one knows when further orders will be issued to the District Attorney's office from the state appellate court, or when a date will be set for hearing Womack's opposition to the matter, no further action may be taken at any level with regard to charges against Womack. The orders from the state do not pertain to Sherrill's part of the case, however. With formal separation of Sherrill's case from that of Womack, trial on charges against him may proceed, according to the judge. At the same time prosecutors asked to separate the co-defendants, defense attorney Ried Roberts declared his intent to file a motion to dismiss the charges against his client, Sherrill. Judge Cruikshank set Feb. 11 as the deadline for prosecutors to file for severance of the co-defendants, and for the defense to file a motion to dismiss the case against Sherrill, and 9 a.m. on March 10 as the time and date for hearing these matters. A check on the status of the appeals in Womack's portion of the case, and if possible, the setting of a trial date for Womack, have been set for March 10. Copyright © 2000 Amador Ledger Dispatch |
|
| Masthead |
E-mail, Postal, Phone and Fax Contact Information |
|
the
Bureaucracy