Criticism over the last minute commutation of the prison sentence of Fabian Nunez’s son is not going away.
The LA Times’ Jack Dolan has the details of the latest development.
The parents of Luis Santos, a 22-year-old college student killed in a confrontation with the son of former Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez, filed suit against former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in Sacramento on Thursday, claiming that his decision to reduce the younger Nuñez’s sentence violated California’s Victims Bill of Rights.
During his last hours in office, Schwarzenegger cut Esteban Nuñez’s 16-year sentence for voluntary manslaughter to seven years, without notifying the Santos family. Schwarzenegger noted in his commutation order that Nuñez, although involved in the fight that ended in Santos’ death, did not inflict the fatal knife wound.
Under the Victims’ Bill of Rights, which was added to the state Constitution following a 2008 ballot measure, victims have a right to be heard “upon request” in any proceeding involving a “post-conviction release decision.” One of the Santos attorneys, Nina Salarno Ashford, said the family members didn’t have a chance to request a hearing because they didn’t know Schwarzenegger was going to take action. The former governor had a duty to inform the family, Ashford said….
Days after releasing the commutation order, Schwarzenegger sent the Santos family a letter apologizing for not informing them of his decision. Fred Santos, the victim’s father, accused Schwarzenegger of reducing the sentence as a favor to Fabian Nuñez, who as Assembly Speaker was often an ally of the governor’s.
The suit asks the court to reinstate Nuñez’s original 16-year sentence, which a San Diego judge imposed after a plea bargain that reduced the original charge of murder to the lesser charge of voluntary manslaughter.
NOTE: Next week I’ll have a portrait of one more young man whose very long sentence Arnold could have commuted instead of that of his buddy’s son.
UPDATE: PATT MORRISON HAS INTERVIEWED THE SANTOS PARENTS
Patt Morrison’s interview with Luis Santos’ parents just went online on Friday night. For those of you interested in the case, it is very much worth reading.
Here is a clip:
What happened that night? The four attackers had been turned away from a San Diego State frat party. They were angry, and then they encountered Luis.
Kathy: He and his friend were jumped. The papers said it was a fight, but I guess it was fight or flight. They were minding their own business. That’s one thing that has annoyed me — almost every report said it was a fight. It was not a fight. Our son’s group was jumped.
One account said Luis was overheard bragging that he was “carrying.”
Fred: Neither Luis nor his friends ever carried any weapons. Luis was joking around with his friends that he was “carrying” by grabbing his cellphone. His murderers overheard what was meant to be a private joke. [Police accounts agree that Luis Santos and his friends were unarmed.]
When the attackers were arrested a couple of months after the killing, did you know who Fabian Nuñez was?
Fred: Fabian Nuñez was one of the most powerful politicians in the state, and apparently he still is. As soon as they told us [Esteban Nuñez was involved], in the back of my mind all along the way, I had to make sure that there was no politics involved in the [legal] decisions. So I kept asking, was there any political pressure? [Law enforcement] put together a solid case.
What do you make of the suggestion that Esteban Nuñez’s high profile as a politician’s son might have made things go harder for him, not easier.
Fred: Until Fabian Nuñez had Arnold Schwarzenegger commute the sentence of his son, this case was never about the Nuñez family. Esteban Nuñez was sentenced for what he [did], regardless of who his father is. Fabian Nuñez made this case about who he is when he went to his political crony Arnold Schwarzenegger and fixed the sentence, just as Esteban bragged his dad would.
For backstory on the case see Christine Pelisek’s excellent 2009 feature in the LA Weekly.
I heard the Santos family lawyer, Nina Salarno Ashford, being interviewed on the radio recently. She’s helping the Santos family pro bono (free) and that’s admirable. It truly is a national disgrace that such a blatant abuse of executive power should be allowed to stand. The legal basis for Schwarzenegger’s decision is applicable to perhaps as many as 10,000 other prisoners who did not personally inflict a wound, but nevertheless aided, abetted counseled or procured the crime. Yet there was no commutation in sentence for any of them.
As I listened to attorney Ashford, it stuck me that she did not have a persuasive argument – asking for reinstatement of Nunez original sentence because Schwarzenegger did not comply with the Victim’s Bill of Rights sounds like a good argument, but from a legal standpoint, it’s weak. The better strategy IMHO would be to ask the court to enjoin (issue an injunction to) the Dept of Corrections from acting on the commutation because the commutation itself is a nullity – it is invalid because it failed to comply with the constitution.
The court could then rescind the commutation, and return it to the Governor’s office where the Governor (Jerry Brown) would then have to comply with the Victim’s Bill of Rights and allow the Santos family to be heard before deciding whether or not to commute Esteban Nunez’s sentence.
And perhaps the logic of the legal strategy I’ve outlined belies the real problem here. Schwarzenegger may be many things, but stupid is not one of them. The motive for commuting Esteban Nunez’s sentence is said to be a favor for Fabian Nunez, but what does Schwarzenegger stand to gain by doing such a controversial favor for Fabian? A parting gift to an old friend at the cost of his reputation? Unlikely. It’s not as if Schwarzenegger has any future in political life – his godawful performance as Governor put an end to that even before this last act of betrayal, so there’s really no way that Fabian Nunez can return the favor for Schwarzenegger – which is the way these things are supposed to happen. No, I think Schwarzenegger did a favor for Jerry Brown by ‘taking the heat’ over this. Nunez is a more useful ally to Brown than he is to Schwarzenegger and can help Brown pass the new laws he needs to get control of the state’s budget. Schwarzenegger also ends up with Jerry owing him a favor, and who would is going to be more useful to Arnold (I’m tired of typing “Schwarzenegger”) – Nunez or Governor Brown?
Which leads me back to my legal strategy. Seeking to declare Arnold’s commutation a nullity is a given; a slam dunk winner. But it puts the ball fairly and squarely back in the Governor’s Office to perfect the original flaw of not complying with the Victim’s Bill of Rights. That makes it Jerry Brown’s hot potato, and it’s not one that he wants because it puts him at odds with Fabian Nunez. How’s that for a conspiracy theory on Sunday morning?
Makes seense to me for the most part.