The first crime is at a Costco. "Appellant was
stopped by a Costco employee after he tried to enter the Oxnard
store without a membership card. He said his mother was inside
and asked to be escorted to her. The employee went with him as
he walked through the store, supposedly looking for his mother.
When they reached the alcohol section, appellant put a bottle of
tequila into his shorts. He left the store with the bottle in his
shorts and without paying for it. When confronted, appellant
threatened to harm the Costco employee. He was arrested for
robbery."
Uh, yeah. That's not the greatest criminal plan in the universe. Why it's not easier to attempt to shoplift at a 7-11, or liquor store, or Rite-Aid, is unclear to me.
There's clearly something "off" to the court as well. "In October 2017, appellant’s attorney declared a doubt as to
his competency to stand trial. After evaluation, he was
committed to the Department of State Hospitals for treatment.
In August 2018, appellant was found competent. He pleaded
guilty to one count of second degree robbery. On September 24,
2018, the trial court granted appellant 36 months’ formal
probation on the condition that he serve one year in county jail
with credit for time served. He was then released from custody."
Fair enough.
The second crime is also a bit bizarre.
"At 7 a.m. on
October 28, 2018, appellant knocked loudly on the front door and
rang the doorbell of a house on Indiana Drive in Oxnard. Artrose
Tuano, who lived in the house with his parents was at home and
watched the video being recorded by his home security system.
He saw appellant walk through a side gate and into the back yard. Appellant tried to open a side door that led to the garage.
He also opened a screen door and then tried to force open a
sliding glass door leading into the house. When he could not get
in the house, appellant sat down on a bench in the backyard.
Tuano called the police. Police officers arrived and found appellant sitting in the
backyard."
Knocking loudly on random doors at 7:00 a.m. and then just sitting there when he can't get in? Weird, no?
The court sentences Mr. Hendrix to ten years in prison. That's a lot. A huge lot. The Court of Appeal declares that's not cruel and unusual punishment. That conclusion isn't surprising at all given the lax doctrinal standards we have for that inquiry.
Still, a decade in prison for weirdly knocking on a door at 7 a.m., trying to get inside, and then sitting on a bench in the back yard when you're unsuccessful? Wow. I know it keeps a strange guy off the streets. But that's really the best our society can do?
Guess so.
Justice Tangeman authors a brief dissent, some of which highlights the weirdness of the present offense. He says:
"Appellant has a history of mental illness. Indeed, he was
found not competent to stand trial in a prior case and was
committed to the Department of State Hospitals for almost one
full year for mental health treatment. He was released from that
commitment only two months before this incident occurred. This
is not an insignificant fact, although it is glossed over in the
majority opinion.
Moreover, the underlying facts of this case readily show
that appellant was not of ‘sound mind’ on October 28, 2018. After
loudly knocking and ringing the doorbell, appellant walked
around the house, tried to force open a door and, when
unsuccessful, simply sat down in the backyard, and waited.
Waited for what? His cousin? Or, as the majority apparently
posits, for the police to arrive to arrest him (which conclusion is
inconsistent with his surprise at seeing the police). He had no burglary tools when arrested and made no further efforts to enter
the house. He simply sat down and waited."
Yep. Not your usual offense. Or offender.
But he'll still be spending a decade in prison.
