Home › News › Local News
Mistrial declared in graffiti case
Download this story as a podcast!
STORY TOOLS 
More from Local NewsA judge on Friday declared a mistrial after jurors were unable to reach a verdict on the vandalism case against a Santa Paula man who was accused of tagging gang graffiti on a large wooden sign at the entrance to Marina Park in Ventura.
Ventura County Superior Court Judge Glen Reiser declared that jurors were deadlocked.
Prosecutor Derek Malan said he didn't know whether he would retry 22-year-old Sergio Martin. The judge set a hearing for Wednesday to find out what the district attorney plans to do.
Eight members of the jury voted in favor of a guilty verdict, and four voted not guilty. Martin was charged with vandalism in excess of $400 and possession of tools to commit graffiti.
Malan said it is difficult to prosecute a case where there was only one witness who saw the vandalism. "If you only have one witness it is always going to be a tough case, but we are committed to trying tough cases," Malan said.
The damage to the sign was $523. Martin was facing six years in prison if he was found guilty of the crimes and if the jury had concluded that he committed the crime for the benefit of a criminal street gang.
Attorney Rod Kodman, who works with the Public Defender's Office, had hoped that the jurors would have reached a verdict.
"I truly believe that Sergio Martin did not commit this crime," Kodman said.
He noted that jurors deliberated for about five hours and had a large portion of the testimony of the lone eyewitness read back to them by the court reporter during their deliberations. The jurors heard four days of testimony from seven witnesses, including two police officers, Kodman said.
Kodman said this is the second time there has been a mistrial in this case. He said his client was tried in March on the same charges, and that jury deadlocked too, with 11 jurors voting guilty and one voting not guilty.
Posted by desdave on September 1, 2007 at 4:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh please retry this case. Keep doing it until you get a quilty verdict. If he gets off it will only encourage others of his low life type to keep tagging. If he did actually do the spraying, he was in the car, and you can bet it was only the latest in many of these he has done. I know how our legal system works and all that, and I'm half kidding, but don't you wish sometimes that there was a law allowing people like this to be locked up on general principles?
Posted by lrgvanman on September 1, 2007 at 6:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You said it desdave. These people need to learn the seriousness of their actions and it would be worth it to actually go to the full extent of the law.
Posted by Face on September 1, 2007 at 7:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The jury system doesn't work anymore, with only undereductated people (most nowadays)serving. We should turn to Permanent juries filled with retired criminal attorneys and judges serving with salary. No need for a jury selection process or to worry about O.J.s running amok in our society unpunished.
Posted by AnnaWhaat on September 1, 2007 at 9:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Personally Im glad ! Six years ! That is insane ! People get that for attempted murder and rape ! Just that fact they wanted to give this guy up to six years makes me happy as heck they are at a mistrial. He had no paint on his hands. No fingerprints were on the cans. The guy who witnessed this (old man) only got a look at this guy and didn't get a change to view the others in the car...... If he DID it Im all for a year. And some community service! BUT they haven't been able to proove he even did it. And Six years just pisses me off !!!!
Posted by thegreatpumpkin on September 1, 2007 at 10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Anna,
It's not 6 years for a first time offense. It's 6 years because he is a confirmed, self-admitted gang member actively committing crimes for the furtherance of his gang. 6 years for a gang crime is appropriate in my book. That's 6 years we don't have to see his face on the streets causing more of the gang problems and shootings we've been having in East Ventura due to a surge in Saticoy gang members' violence.
If you want to get mad, get mad at the fact that of his 6 years, he get's credit for good time/ work time to the tune of half his sentance. That makes it 3 years. Plus he can recieve extra time off due to credit for time served and overcrowding. This could likely result in only serving 12 to 18 months of his 6 year sentance.
Most people are not aware of that. Then they get mad because Paris and nicole and all the other celeb's get "reduced sentances." Everyone gets reduced sentences is California. That's our system. Unless voter's change it...
Posted by AnnaWhaat on September 1, 2007 at 10:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Not everyone....and yes I am very aware of the court system and how messed up it is. So I uphold my stance on him not being found guilty. Just the way I feel. Besides they can't even prove he did it.
I'm all for getting criminals off the streets.And someone even hears the word gang and Bam! But I can personally tell you some people that have been listed as gang members that are not......There is no perfect system. Labeling alot of people gang members that aren't isn't right. Now if they confess to belonging to a gang then so be it. BUT I still think six years is too long. So how much time has he already done? If he has done any at all then that is enough and just get on with the community service. It doesn't take six years to teach someone a lesson....
Posted by sog55 on September 1, 2007 at 11:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Furtherance of his gang? Obviously you aren't from the streets. 6 years for grafitti is not even in the realm of common sense. There has to be some other contributing factors here. But by not mentioning them it gets people all stirred up..which I think is the desired effect. The paper knows exactly whats doing here by presenting this story like this.
Posted by thegreatpumpkin on September 1, 2007 at 11:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Because he doesn't learn. He's already been arrested and tried once. Has he been remorseful? He is still the same low life gang member. He is still committing gang crimes. He is still causing trouble for the citizens of Ventura.
Want to make an informed decision? Look at his arrest record. It's public information on Venturacountysuperiorcourt.org
Then defend him.
Posted by desdave on September 1, 2007 at 11:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree that if it was a first offence with no other record 6 years wouldn't be fair, and wouldn't be the punishment called for. A 22 gang banger has to have a record going back years, they just haven't bothered to print it. If he's still doing this stuff at 22, you are looking at a low life that will be victimizing people the rest of his life...a life that will probably end early with bullet.
Posted by AnnaWhaat on September 1, 2007 at 5:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
thegreatpumpkin,Why bother to give out the site you KNOW you have to have the guys birthdate? DO YOU? Why send people to this site in search of something they wont find.
Well I hope his life doesn't end that way....I can tell you people can change. Give him a chance!
Posted by cody1000 on September 1, 2007 at 5:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"The witness, David Satterberg of Ventura, testified this week that he stood across the street and watched the spray-painting of the sign 70 feet away, from the second floor of his two-story apartment.
He said he saw a maroon-colored car with chrome wheels pull up to the sign about 7:35 p.m. on Dec. 28, 2005.
One of the four alleged gang members in the car was Martin, according to testimony.
Satterberg told police that a man weighing 185 to 200 pounds spray painted the sign. Police stopped a vehicle fitting the description of the car used during the vandalism about a half-hour later on Highway 101.
Police drove Satterberg to Highway 101, where he identified Martin without getting a close look at the others in the car.
Malan told jurors that Satterberg could see that the others were small-framed men who didn’t fit the physical description.
Also, Malan said Satterberg had a good view earlier when Martin had faced Satterberg and cursed and threatened him. Nothing stood between the two men, Malan said."
maybe the annawhite should invite this fine young man to live with her. don't ask the rest of us to put up with him any longer.
Posted by cody1000 on September 1, 2007 at 5:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
remember the beautiful woman in la who was shot in the head recently for identifying a tagger. maybe thats why anna is afraid to prosecute.
Posted by concernedcitizen29 on September 1, 2007 at 6:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
All you people need to understand that this person Sergio Martin's case has been declared a mistrial in two different occassions. You people need to stop trying to be above the law because you're not, instead of being on here commenting on things you don't really know get the facts straight before you comment again. You need to understand he was set free and that's it, to continue to take it to trial is pointless, how many more times do you think they should take it to trial before you are satisfied. This man is innocent so get a life and stop trying to prove him guilty when you don't know nothing about him or this case only what you've read on the newspaper and what kind of facts are those. Get a hobby or get a life.
Posted by concernedcitizen29 on September 1, 2007 at 6:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hello i'm serious all the people here except for AnnaWhaat need to really get all your facts straight. You don't know anything about his person yet you want to set here and make judgements on him and his background. You know nothing about this person yet you feel you have the right to sit here and try to put him in prison for six years for something that you don't even know he did. If he was really guilty he would already be in prison no matter what. I really want somebody here to stand up and show me that you know this person personally and really think he is so dangerous that we need to put him in prison for six years.
Posted by Comments on September 1, 2007 at 6:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I actually have a lot more faith in our judicial system and jury system then Face99 does. Sure they get things "wrong" from time to time. And yes, it does sting when that happens. Was that the case here? I'm not sure - I wasn't sitting on the jury. What I do know is that 2 separate juries could not agree to find him guilty resulting in mistrial both times. Surely there is enough doubt that neither jury would convict. Like it or not that is exactly the way our justice system is supposed to work. One is to be found guilty if there is no reasonable doubt. If reasonable doubt exists then you should not in good conscience vote guilty. Although I suspect this lad was indeed up to no good I respect the jury members who voted not guilty because there was indeed reasonable doubt as to his guilt.
Frankly it sounds as though the prosecuter did not do his/her job. If the 1st trial resulted in a mistrial then better evidence should've been presented this time around. Simply going back to the drawing board with the same old information was a waste of tax payer money.
And, as much as this guy may be a loser with past crimes under his belt, his past had no forbearing on this case. He was being tried for this case. If he didn't do it, he didn't do it. If he was in the car and someone else did it then bring that someone else to trial. And, I also agree w/ Anna that 6 yrs is excessive for graffiti. No, I do NOT condone crime at all of any kind. I particularly abhor crimes done in the name of street gangs in order to get more street cred. Many of these kids are the future scums of the earth. Then again, I also still feel there's hope for some. I hope that this guy takes this lesson seriously and was scared enough to go straight. If not, then hopefully his next crime will be victimless and we'll get him then.
And, for the record Face99 permanent juries with sitting retired criminal attorneys and judges is one of the silliest ideas I've heard. I firmly believe in being judged by a jury of your peers. I do think you make a point in that juries are often not our peers. Someone standing trial deserves to have juries who are true "peers" and we should strive for that more.
Posted by ironwoman on September 1, 2007 at 7:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If you weren't on the jury then you don't know the facts. If you have ever been on a jury, you really get details of what actually occurred. If he did it, then he got off free. He will probably do it again, hopefully get caught and hopefully go to jail. Most criminals seem to dig much deeper holes and eventually get caught. If not, they have to live with themselves and answer to a much more higher power.
Posted by AnnaWhaat on September 2, 2007 at 6:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
cody1000,Maybe you should wait to see if he is found GUILTY !!!!!!! huh. He did say it was someone else in the car. I suppose when they are all slotched down in the car they appear smaller?
I am NOT afraid to prosecute. That was real mature ! If he is found guilty ,then we will see. But I still say six years is insane! And if I had the room I would let him live here !!!! Just because you think he is a gang member. And he may or maynot be.... doesn't make him dangerous. He was a mere 20 years old when this happened. ALot of people make stupid mistakes at that age. But I guess your life was just grand and you never did. I just dont want to see an innocent man to prison.
concernedcitizen29 , I agree ! Isnt it like over 6,000.00 a day to go to Jury?
Comments , I agree ! WHY do people insist on GUILT when a jury can not and hasn't found him Guilty not once but twice? And if he did it.....I personally do not know. Then I doubt seriously he would do it again!
Posted by THX1138 on September 2, 2007 at 8:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Often the news omits key information - who's fingerprints were found on the spray can or were gloves used... Where were the cans found and did it match the paint found at the scene..?
[Sgt. Friday:] Just the facts ma'am....
Posted by concernedcitizen29 on September 2, 2007 at 11:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
i'm serious are you still talking about this case. It's done and over with, you need to move on and start commenting on different articles because this one is getting old. Probably everybody has a crush on this person that you all have to spend your whole day commenting on this one article, when you can be enjoying this beautiful sunny day outdoors. So turn off your computer and step away from of it and go do something else. It seems like everybody here has never committed a mistake in there lives.
Posted by surfmedic91 on September 2, 2007 at 1:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
concernedcitizen29, seems to me there was evidence to arrest him and bring this to trial. This was a "mistrial" twice. Not a "not guilty" verdict. It doesn't mean he didn't do it. I think the boys in Pierpont should take this to trial for tagging up our signs. the biggest proof is that he wrote his "name" there and is a documented gang member.
Posted by AnnaWhaat on September 2, 2007 at 7:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
WHERE did you read he wrote his name !!!! OMG stop making crap up ! Just to make it look like he is guilty when he hasn't been proven !!!!
Posted by concernedcitizen29 on September 2, 2007 at 9:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
surfmedic91 you need to get your facts straight and stop commenting on things you know nothing about, okay let me ask you this if he wrote his name on there, what is it. God i am so tired of people coming on here posting up these comments like they know everything and anything about this person and about this case. and also if everybody in here thought he was guilty why is he out, the reason is he is not guilty because either your innocent or your guilty there is no in between. So get a life and stop trying to comment on things that you know nothing about. Okay that's all i have to say and goodnight.
Posted by Angelito on September 3, 2007 at 7:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I would rather see this kind of crimes punished with one to two years of graffity removal working full time (8hrs) each day for the full lenght of his sentence. This would not only deter the person from comittting more grafity, but would save some money from having people from the city or the state cleaning graffity, and would solve overcrowding in the jails.
Posted by Angelito on September 3, 2007 at 7:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I would rather see this kind of crimes punished with one to two years of graffity removal working full time (8hrs) each day for the full lenght of his sentence. This would not only deter the person from comittting more grafity, but would save some money from having people from the city or the state cleaning graffity, and would solve overcrowding in the jails.
Posted by FedUp on September 4, 2007 at 10:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)
concernedcitizen29 - I think you should take your own advice, and get outside and enjoy some sunshine. it sounds like you took a real liking to this criminal loser gang banger. you have been supporting him since the articles have been in the paper recently. If you don't like what people are saying about your BFF, maybe you should just ignore the comments on here.
do you think O.J. is innocent??
Posted by mochachip81 on September 7, 2007 at 2:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Retrying this case would cost us, the taxpayers, money. Why retry it? You all hear "Gang Member" and are ready to throw him in jail without even knowing all of the facts. Admittedly, I don't either. I do know, however, that being a gang member does not equal being a cold blooded killer or criminal. Before people start to jump all over me and accuse me of being in a gang, I'm not. I am a graduate of UC Berkeley, got my master's degree from UCLA, and am now working full time. In fact, my work has to do with helping these young people at risk who have turned to gangs for several reasons. Some of those reasons being our failure as a society to adequately educate and support everyone in our community. Obviously there are hard core gang members that do deserve to go to jail, but before we jump all over someone who has gang ties perhaps we need to understand their level of involvement. Is he in a gang because he is trying to fill a need for a family to keep him safe? Has he turned to gang life because it is a way to gain income and support his family? Again, being in a gang is not the ideal way to get these needs met. It is something, however, that has been created in large part by what our communites are lacking and people who refuse to really look at what purpose these gangs serve.
Also, I would just like to say that the level of immaturity in these postings is quite sad.
Posted by My2Cents on September 8, 2007 at 3:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If he's guilty can his butt. If he's not, let's move on. Same 'ole, same 'ole stuff... Hey, maybe if this guy see's his grandma having to clean-up the mess, maybe then, he'll be ashamed enough to STOP THE STUPIDITY... 2-years of this stuff, enough already. However, everyone is entitled to a fair trial:Innocent until proven guilty.
Posted by AnnaWhaat on September 9, 2007 at 9:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
mochachip81 ,I enjoyed your post. Thankyou for working with our young ones !
My2Cents, Check out the Oxnard or Ventura Section..Not sure BUT they are NOT going to retry him. Its all over........
(Requires free registration.)
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.