CONVICTED: Was justice served?
more information on voting
When you vote, you are voting on whether or not the punishment fit the crime, NOT on the severity of the case itself. If you feel the sentence was very weak, you would vote 1 star. If you feel the sentence was very strong, you would vote 5 stars.
Please vote honestly and realistically. These ratings will be used a a tool for many future programs, including a "People’s Choice" of best and worst sentencing, DA and judge "report cards", and more. Try to resist the temptation to vote 1 star on every case, even if you feel that 100 years in prison isn’t enough.
Case #5890 Rating: 3.8 out of 5
10 cats, 1 dog yanked by their collars
Sunnyvale, CA (US)Incident Date: Saturday, Oct 31, 1998
County: Santa Clara
Disposition: Convicted
Defendant/Suspect: Leo Jimenez,, III
In Nov 1998, Amy Mendez armed herself with a neighbor, her neighbor's dogs and a camera and set off for Carmelita's dog-grooming service on Knickerbocker Drive.
As a former client who helped bring the owner, Leo Jimenez, up on charges of animal abuse in September, Mendez was eager to make sure that he wasn't violating the terms of his probation by working with animals that weren't his own. And, as she had feared, she found Jimenez walking a dog out to a customer's car.
Two months before, Jimenez pleaded no contest to 11 counts of animal abuse, including the death of two animals. Judge Marilyn Zecker sentenced Jimenez to sell his business, to stop working with animals that weren't his for two years, to perform 250 hours of community service and to take an anger management class.
Due in part to Mendez's diligence, Jimenez will instead spend two years in San Quentin.
After Mendez alerted the authorities that Jimenez was in violation of his probation, his probation officer immediately filed a petition for a new hearing. And on March 16, Judge Kevin Murphy pronounced the new, harsher sentence.
Santa Clara County deputy district attorney John Chase said that because the terms of the original probation were revoked when a new sentence was issued, the original terms are now invalid, including the condition that Jimenez not work with animals. Whether Jimenez can handle animals again will be determined when he gets out of prison.
"There is a balancing of issues here," Chases said. "If there is a drawback to this sentence, it's that we may not have the ability to retain that condition. There are pluses and minuses here. [Imprisonment] is obviously a much more severe sentence, but we may lose some control."
A Carmelita's flier that still included Jimenez's name alerted Mendez to the possibility that he hadn't sold the business and was still working with animals. She then contacted John Chase and Maria Alvarez, Jimenez' probation officer, who encouraged her to drive by the grooming service and make sure he wasn't still there.
Mendez and her neighbor pretended to be interested in prices of various services such as a dog bath and nail clipping, but when she realized that the man behind the counter was the same man who caused serious damage to her dog's eye, she left her friend to finish the inquiry. Mendez wasn't concerned that Jimenez would recognize her, since--despite the earlier court proceedings--they had had limited face-to-face contact.
"I was so amazed and dumbfounded when I realized that he was right there," Mendez said. "It was like he was thumbing his nose at the sentence."
Jimenez pleaded guilty to one felony count of animal abuse in the original trial, even though there were a total of 11 complaints. Chase said that the other counts were dropped in order to reach a settlement, on the stipulation that Judge Zecker be able to refer to them when sentencing Jimenez.
In total, the complaints involved criminal negligence with one cat and 10 dogs. Chase said that most of the injuries appeared to be caused by sharp yanks on the animals' collars, resulting in trauma sustained to the neck and eyes.
"It looks like most of these were caused by a venting of anger," Chase said.
Mendez said she feels sorry that Jimenez has to go to prison, but feels that justice has been served.
"I don't want this person to ever hurt another animal again," she said. "He should have obeyed the rules." References« CA State Animal Cruelty Map
« More cases in Santa Clara County, CA
|
