Daniel Angel Escalante appeared for sentencing before Judge Thomas Stockard in the Tenth Judicial District Court on March 5. Escalante, who pleaded No Contest last December to a charge of Attempt to Commit Battery Causing Substantial Bodily Harm, is facing an uncertain outcome. The offense is considered a “wobbler” and may be sentenced as a Gross Misdemeanor punishable by up to 364 days in jail or as a Category D Felony, which carries 1-4 years in prison.
Deputy District Attorney Priscilla Baker asked the court to sentence the charge as a felony based on the circumstances of the incident as well as Escalante's extensive criminal history, which began in 1982 and included the exploitation of an elderly victim.
This case, according to Baker, involved a church-going female victim who agreed to go out with Escalante. On their first date, they discussed sex; however, she told Escalante that she was not interested in sex. At some point, Escalante asked her to help clean his house. Due to a transportation issue, she agreed to spend the night and clean in the morning. She woke up to being assaulted.
The victim elected not to appear in court; however, she asked Baker to relay her feelings and what she would have said in an impact statement. Steve Evenson, Esq., defense counsel for Escalante, objected, stating that would be hearsay. Baker responded, “I’m trying to advocate on behalf of the victim.” Judge Stockard sustained the objection, explaining that Baker cannot give the victim’s statement as the defense cannot cross-examine an absent victim.
Baker urged Judge Stockard to sentence the case a D Felony, not a Gross Misdemeanor, closing her arguments by explaining that a physical exam showed abrasions and a tear from the assault, evidence of the assault, and the resulting substantial bodily harm.
Evenson called five witnesses to testify to Escalante’s character during defense arguments. These included Escalante’s spouse, clients, friends, and pastor. All testified that they felt Escalante was an honest, hardworking man whom they trusted and had never seen make any untoward advances toward themselves or others.
Evenson then referred to the Pre-Sentence Investigation. Baker objected as the state had not yet received Escalante’s Pre-Sentence Investigative Report (PSI). Stockard struck comments related to the PSI, stating it was unacceptable that the state had not received their copy. Baker asked for a continuance to review the information in the report and provide it to the victim, who may then decide to provide victim impact testimony.
Judge Stockard continued the matter to April 2.
Comment
Comments