The Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division Two, restored an assault with a deadly weapon charge Dec. 13 against a man accused of assaulting his partner in front of their children. The Court of Appeal ruled that Riverside Superior Judge Valerie Navarro incorrectly dismissed the charge on an analysis of the evidence, and only could have dismissed the charge on a finding of fact.
Domestic violence
Prosecutors charged Armando Mendez with three felony counts for assault with a deadly weapon, child endangerment and a criminal threat, and one misdemeanor count of domestic battery.
According to the appellate ruling, Mendez had drunkenly punctured a tire on their car with a knife, pushed his partner and threatened to hit her with the knife if she did not take their children outside. Before the police arrived, he threatened to kill her outside, the ruling said. Conflicting testimony from his partner did not make it clear if he was still holding the knife against her, or threatening her with it.
Dismissal requested
Because of the conflicting testimony, Mendez’s defense counsel requested the court dismiss the assault with a deadly weapon charge.
“I don’t know exactly what happened with the knife, did he hold it above his head, was it down around his waist area? I don’t know if there is enough evidence for (assault with a deadly weapon),” the defense counsel said, according to the ruling.
Riverside Superior Judge Valerie Navarro agreed.
“The court does agree with defense counsel, I didn’t see sufficient evidence for assault with a deadly weapon holding order on that,” Navarro said, according to the appellate ruling.
Facts, not analysis
The Court of Appeal found that Navarro should not have dismissed the count based on a finding of evidence. She could have dismissed the case only based on factual findings, but did not have the power to dismiss the case based on an analysis of the evidence, the court ruled.
The court made an analogy to a rape charge when it explained its decision: a judge may dismiss a rape charge after finding that there was consent, but a judge can not dismiss a rape charge because there was not enough evidence of lack of consent.
“The prosecution’s evidence thus supports reasonable inferences that by putting himself in close proximity to Doe and aggressively wielding a sharp knife, Mendez equipped and positioned himself to carry out a battery and that he ‘actually used the knife in a way capable of producing, and likely to produce, death or great bodily injury—that is, as a deadly weapon,’” the court ruled.
Case information
Riverside County Deputy District Attorney Richard Sachs prosecutes.
Riverside County Deputy Public Defender Jason Cox defends.
Riverside Superior Court Case No. INF2101604.
Appellate Case No. E079069.
Read the appellate ruling here.
