Court Opinion

ID: 4058645
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-09-29 09:14:28.084473+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:05:24.612860
License: Public Domain

~f!~~r~fR) n~n.
                                                          t_oom_QJ£;> ~IOliV\ n &Lbdl. H~ \J
                                        ----------------._~     .   ~~~~~~~~~~--

     --------------------------~------~J~~U~L~D~1~~~~---------
     _f1tt~tJ Co0 -1:- C1-e r /{ :,_-.----'---'--------'-~
                                                         Ab@~, GK@Jflk

   · --:L_(O_t::~_v,_±l~__ho..v~ CL        c~ f;:)enol/~_LL_I__________
   +b--<, '3_3 9±b /0 ,·si-r/c.±· Cqi..A-( f- o_LJ±Q£CJ~_C,Q-=c~=---=-=--='j-=J-t--------'---
    T~__uJJct~c_ A_c-t:LC.t~. lJ. a 7 /io.Jo~~ Coreu_5 ______
  ·._w_c{+ o_o. I;)_7__!±K_Lf0 -A. l0 e_;_or to +ht's~f~~ff~~~.._(~-~~-
    o_.f_ce.,~~s+ J Lj,ow coL.U+ r-~:;~~t'vwl _a...-_ t~.Jf~.L--------'---:--­
    _f·(_DM  ~~-o...rJ_~pli-d on- IJe.c~ 30J ~OJ'+ r\§o.-rdt~--
• ~-~-c~~~5+ +o . ~-o~_(_£j_-fh~ _·+r~_IJ3r\o. +t'~ i SSL<...eS. j - -
   1:b~_c.J -e-c: t~ S.h~_L-~M-e.J~ i o..,+el~e_o.~'~ sn I ~ .().1 ~o1% _o+ :/:beL+____
  _ o_rde.J · 0..11d p'coo..f' o+ fu-..e.._dG.:t~ fh~ 's+nc+ e>..-+t-orn~----­
    Cf...C:e-~~-d ~-<..... ho.Ao·e.,ct.-0 Ovp~o I i~i_o/1 .._ T ·fl{ed a.. LJL; ~ o .(:
    Mat\da.ML~~--W_Lfu ~-.(._. +do.) C..OUC±_S~CJLd 0~ i/Wl'L ~_:)_()j_5__~
    ~~~i:L... . lLU_r·e-r:::> I:I___Q___£ o..cti_o_o._Q /1 Jbe..i i Cc ~ o...l -F o... S .U~i -5 · W..r:_L--"-'-t-_ _
•     o .f M.0v/"ld C>..M~~--I~M- r-fJ C'l oJ Ci:b_-Gd ~ ~±- l0..'--J f~ C -f:-h~. _. -· ·
  tC~t\S_bi_'$:5_~_0/1. O~t ~~-~ o-.r;J oJ l d0CLll"1:eLJ+<.>~o...ro:zal ·:+o_ rfb·!'d._-·'_-'__
   co..W'-<-..1 .LLs_w_e.i/-) ~-< +nOvl COu.{_+ 0 (" CO/I V/~G+t.D[J;___J;O~'t- h?--~
                0
 f'o.tJe..d---±o          1~l 'fl-w_i ±b_J_____r~£N5 l<.u.Je_-5 e; ~ A~JCL~--~ _
                         coM
J?co~Y..{=0_~~J~~[~_LS_J 6~ · to..([-('19_±_o_('L5J:Ji!L~---~-~--~~~­
                                                                                                    •
_-th.~l~-s:s~_   . -_ca,i_-s~_in. +h--c_uci_-t- o~ h~I_-e..cLo_J_j A   d:b~ · CoY.L-t- o~·       CcLI-:J/n r:J..,t/ . 1-te,_oe..c:_ot.l_S~·-------
                                                   --      ----,-----------

_1 1~-[__~~S_+/f19_±ha..+ ..f-IA/ 6 ·L':JQ.tiif b:-t:_ .t~t;.~b.±-_ .fo -~4:::!__·___ _
-~tf:_-e.J:]±i~on· C ~ovt..r C..O~c.f.-· er_T__ {"~t.i.e.S-f o- _r~ . be3..C..l{
 c n l~h~-+hx L. o 'r 6 o+· f"\~ ~~~t-,~_hQ~ +ro..""'sr-"itted ·<;A.11j · •
_do C.(•.~~C,..te.LJ ±5 +-o   .frJ-Dl-t.~Cou..tt_ __sJ r.c..:c__~_u.u..r_r-<..5e_on:s--c o .C
JJ_~c~3 0 J cQ 014. "I.LlJJ)_+J_~_Z_C:L9:_~5± -~+~~-<-- ~e.Ic.~---
_o_f_~~Qu..( co~± o. nd --~~o ri t~ ..f-t-, o.._-f:-" a.._~MQI')d ~-!:-<,._____
_b ~-l_s_~~ +D ±h~_c.o 1)_\LLc...±t~<:; c.oU£~r_o_L t±~rci 6 COA-(')+~__1____
_ l ~_-fo_L\....LCi±-o..D_~_L~ 7Lf~!f_() 8_fo (~_d.h~_T('O.A ~Mj SStO" o -{'
_.fb~ ho..b~ C~Go_<:oL .._L_c~~LLe:5f- .J:ho...,f- ±b-.e_5~ docu.ne.r>fS                            __
:...p c~-e.r;±e)~ - +n· ~_n ~---6::L _P,· L~oL__(n J e>u.r co~r t 0-.nd -.
_C~±u..l:LLed          ~_O_c_C~~Q_:b-_~__el_-e.Ci$L_.f?_I_G-:;r.
    ·,;;
                       Court.    This affidavit is intended to respond to the Court's order addressing habeas
                       claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.

                       1.       I did not discover any information that led me to believe that the identifi?ation
                       procedure employed by law enforcement officers was impermissibly suggestive.
                       2.       I did not believe that it was necessary or beneficial to file a suppression motion
                       and secure an evidentiary hearing in an attempt to suppress the pre-trial and/or in court
                       identification since I could not find any grounds to make such an objection.
                       3.       I did not become aware of any exculpatory information. There was a substantial
                       discrepancy in the description the complaining witness gave to the police officer that is
                       noted in the police offense report in that the witn.ess told the officer that the suspects
                       hair was gray or partially gray. She also described the suspect as being 5'10" to 6'00"
                       and 150 to 170 pounds. The police offense report shows the Defendant to be 6'1" and·
                       200 pounds.
                       4.       The complainant testified in court that she is 4'7'' tall.    She testified that the
                       suspect was just a little taller than her. I did not feel that it would have been beneficial to
                       point out the description given in the police offense report because that description
                       given at or near the time this offense would have been closer to the description of this
.

    Defendant than her description In court of him. However, I attempted to impeach the
    complaining witness's identification of the Defendant based on her testimony that the
    assailant was just a little taller than 4'7".
    5.        I did not feel it was beneficial or necessary to urge Defendant's pro se motions to
    dismiss or set aside indictment because I did not feel that said motion had sufficient

*   grounds for the Judge to grant said motion. I did not find any defects in the indictment.

    6.
              Since the State has the burden to prove the Defendant's guilt beyond a
    reasonable doubt_ I             di~

    would_have bolstered the State's case.
                                              not want to subpoena or                     ~ttem~t   to introduce any evi_d_e!"Jc_e
                                                                                     I objected every time the District Attorney
                                                                                                                                       ~_!1~-~   ..

    referred to those bank records in an attempt to raise reasonable doubt as to whether
    this Defendant or anyone else used those credit cards that the complaining witness
    testified were used.
              No bank records were offered or admitted into evidence.                                             I did not want to
    subpoena the bank records because I did not want to help the State's case against my
    client.    Since I did not subpoena the bank records, there would be no need for a
    business records affidavit.
              The above affidavit is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

              Respectfully submitted this                                       1M day of ;}c-tv&;£, 2014.

    SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this                                               _·::r-'--_ day of Oc ..\-,b.<   (l. ,   2014.

                                                           VICTOR H SALCEDO
                                                        My Commission Expires
                                                          February 12, 2018

                                                                          ! .
    .~ .~.

                                          .   -   -·~   .....   ·--· ·-   ...
               . . . · :: . . ~a:,·:~-~:<.-,-u·:::··:.H/,::,:;i
                 ,I~

                                                                                    2
     .

r·