Pretrial Motions Begin in DUI Murder Case as Court Considers Change of Venue
Like others in Orange County and Southern California, our Santa Ana drunk driving criminal defense attorneys have followed the trial of Andrew Gallo on three charges of second-degree murder while driving drunk. Gallo is the driver accused of causing the deaths of Nick Adenhart, a pitcher for the Angels, as well as Courtney Stewart and Henry Pearson, among other crimes. Gallo's attorney has repeatedly argued that his trial should be moved out of Orange County, saying the he cannot get a fair trial here because of the media surrounding Adenhart's death. Lower courts have ruled against that motion, so pretrial motions began Sept. 1, the Orange County Register reported. However, Gallo has appealed his case to the California Supreme Court, which may decide in his favor before jury selection starts on or around Sept. 13.
Gallo's criminal defense attorney filed the appeal with the high court Aug. 30. In it, she argues that Orange County Register readers rated Adenhart's death as the most important story of the year in an online poll, eclipsing the death of Michael Jackson, the economy and the inauguration of Barack Obama. In a phone survey, she said, 76 percent of potential jurors said they believed Gallo was guilty. Similar arguments have already been rejected in the Fourth District Court of Appeal and the Orange County Superior Court, although the judge in the case says he may consider a change of venue for the verdict or sentencing. Gallo is accused of driving drunk when he ran a red light in his minivan and slammed into Stewart's car, pinning it against a lamp post. In addition to killing Stewart, Pearson and Adenhart, the accident also seriously injured passenger Jonathan Wilhite. Gallo had a previous DUI and was driving on a suspended license, leading prosecutors to charge him with second-degree murder rather than DUI manslaughter.
As Garden Grove DUI criminal defense lawyers, we hope that the lower courts are right that Orange County jurors can be fair to Gallo. But we believe that Gallo has a reasonable argument that they may not be. Courts allow changes of venue when the case has gotten so much publicity that it's not clear whether jurors can be fair and unbiased. Given the publicity around the trial, and especially the phone survey cited in the Supreme Court filing, this appears to be an open question. So we hope the Supreme Court considers the petition carefully. A lot is riding on this outcome, because Gallo is accused of very serious crimes. In particular, the prosecutors have chosen to charge him with second-degree murder rather than manslaughter, reasoning that his prior conviction means he knew drunk driving was wrong when he did it anyway. A conviction on those charges alone could put Gallo in prison for 45 years, rather than the 12 to 30 years he would have faced for DUI manslaughter. Anyone with this much at stake deserves a fair trial.
Continue reading "Pretrial Motions Begin in DUI Murder Case as Court Considers Change of Venue" »