Syracuse, NY - Joseph Manzi made his own legal argument in court recently in a bid to get freed from jail while his larceny and forgery case is pending. He didn’t get out, but he appeared to have convinced state Supreme Court Justice John Brunetti that he shouldn’t remain in custody under the circumstances. Manzi didn’t seem to be making...
Syracuse, NY - Joseph Manzi made his own legal argument in court recently in a bid to get freed from jail while his larceny and forgery case is pending.
He didn’t get out, but he appeared to have convinced state Supreme Court Justice John Brunetti that he shouldn’t remain in custody under the circumstances.
Manzi didn’t seem to be making any headway early on in his pitch that he should be released because more than 45 days had passed without the prosecution having a grand jury take action. Because the case is still pending in DeWitt court, Brunetti said he didn’t have any authority to grant Manzi’s request.
“Are you suggesting your research skills are superior to mine?” Brunetti pointedly asked Manzi when the defendant disagreed with the judge.
But the tone of the overall argument suddenly changed when Manzi explained he had been freed on his own recognizance when the prosecution did not hold a required preliminary hearing within six days of his arrest. He was taken back into custody on a bench warrant July 20 for missing a DeWitt court appearance, he said.
Brunetti then noted he didn’t think the DeWitt court had any authority to issue a bench warrant after Manzi was released in the first place. But the judge candidly admitted he did not have any authority to intervene.
Instead, Brunetti gave Manzi a new legal road map.
He suggested Manzi file a new motion in DeWitt court seeking his release because authorities still have not held a preliminary hearing. If the DeWitt court rejects his bid, Manzi should then file a habeas corpus writ to bring the matter before Brunetti in a manner that does give him authority to act.
Lawyer balks, defendant takes plea deal
Defense lawyer Zeke Neuman clearly was hesitant about recommending client Raul Toledo plead guilty to aggravated unlicensed operation (AUO) of a motor vehicle in a DWI case.
Neuman said there was no evidence that the Spanish-speaking client ever was told he faced a suspension or revocation of his driver’s license when a misdemeanor DWI case was reduced in May 2009 and he pleaded guilty to driving while his ability was impaired.
There also was no evidence Toledo ever signed a written acknowledgment of any revocation or suspension, Neuman said.
Onondaga County Judge Anthony Aloi said Neuman could make those arguments at trial, but the judge noted the prosecution probably could easily overcome them. The judge also said the deal on the table – in which Toledo would be placed on five years’ probation if he pleaded guilty to felony AUO and misdemeanor DWI – was a very favorable one.
Assistant District Attorney Bridget Scholl then pointed out the prosecution might not be willing to offer such a favorable sentence again, given Toledo’s prior criminal record that included a manslaughter conviction in Puerto Rico.
Aloi then asked Toledo – through interpreter Tony Mueller – what he wanted to do. Toledo took the deal and pleaded guilty.
Neuman then asked if the judge would consider letting Toledo out of jail pending sentencing. Aloi rejected that request, noting he didn’t want the defendant getting in any trouble that would disrupt the probationary sentence to be imposed.