Lawyers for former San Francisco 49ers star days after Dana Stubblefield’s 2020 rape conviction was reversed by an appeals court citing “racist language” used by prosecutors during trial. said they expect Stubblefield to be released from custody within the next few days.
Attorney Allen Sawyer told the Times that he and fellow attorney Kenneth Rosenfeld, who also represents Stubblefield, filed a motion Tuesday in Santa Clara Superior Court asking for Stubblefield’s release. Sawyer said a public hearing could be held by the end of this week.
“This hearing will only discuss the circumstances of his detention, as the Court of Appeals vacated his conviction and at this time he has not been convicted of any crime, including the parking ticket,” Sawyer said. Ta. “We anticipate that he should ultimately be returned on a so-called remittance from the Court of Appeals to the Court of First Instance and be released pending formal notification of revocation and instructions on how to proceed. I am doing it.”
Sawyer said the transfer is expected to take place in February, at which time a decision will be made whether a retrial will take place.
Stubblefield played 11 seasons in the NFL with San Francisco, Washington and Oakland, winning Defensive Rookie of the Year (1993) and Defensive Player of the Year (1997) with the 49ers.
In May 2016, Stubblefield was charged with raping a woman at gunpoint the previous year. During the trial, Stubblefield’s defense argued that the sex was consensual. He was sentenced to 15 years to life in prison in October 2020 after a jury found him guilty of forcible rape, forcible oral copulation and false imprisonment, and found he used a firearm in the first two crimes. .
Last week, California’s 6th Circuit Court of Appeals issued the 2020 California Racial Judiciary Act, which prohibits judges, attorneys, law enforcement officials, and others from “exhibiting bias or hostility toward a defendant because of the defendant’s race or ethnicity.” In accordance with the law, Stubblefield’s conviction was vacated. , or country of origin. ”
The appeals court’s decision was based on language used in prosecutors’ closing arguments, which began nearly two months after a white police officer killed George Floyd, a Black man, in Minneapolis on May 25, 2020. , which sparked protests across the United States over the summer.
“In closing arguments, prosecutors argued that police made the decision not to search the Stubblefield home.” [for a gun] “It is based in part on the fact that he was a well-known black man,” the opinion reads. “Prosecutors argued that the search would cause a “storm of controversy,” adding, “Can you imagine in Morgan Hill searching for African-Americans?” but defense attorneys disputed this. The trial court sustained the objection but provided no recommendations or instructions to the jury regarding this part of the prosecutor’s argument.
The opinion continued as follows: “Prosecutors found that Mr. Stubblefield’s race prevented law enforcement from searching his home in violation of the Racial Justice Act, codified in part in Penal Code Section 745. The statement specifically asserted that if Stubblefield had not been black, the search could have taken place and the gun had been found, and therefore Stubblefield was black. This suggests that he was given an unfair advantage in court.
“Second, the claim that the raid would ‘spark a storm of controversy’ is an implicit reference to the then recent events following the killing of George Floyd, and racially biased perceptions of those events.” appealed to Stubblefield and associated them based on his race. We find that the prosecution’s statements amounted to “racially discriminatory statements” regarding Stubblefield’s race within the meaning of Section 745(a)(2) of the Penal Code, and we condemn his conviction. was sought or obtained in violation of subsection (a). …We must vacate the conviction and sentence, find it legally invalid, and order new proceedings pursuant to subsection (a). ”
The Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office told the Times in a statement Tuesday that it is “considering the comments.”
In an interview with TMZ on Monday, Rosenfeld said Stubblefield was “euphoric” over the overturning of his conviction, and Sawyer said he was looking forward to his client being released and being able to be with his family. He added that he is doing so.
Source link
