CALIFORNIA -- A judge has denied two defense motions to dismiss the cases against three charged for a dog attack in Palermo last May.
Defense attorneys had claimed the prosecution failed to preserve evidence in the cases against Chic Gordon of Palermo, Ruben Daniel Cambra of Oroville, and Theodore Jason Scherbensky of Oroville.
The defendants were charged after two dogs — a pit bull named Gus and a Queensland heeler named Shane — allegedly attacked Virginia Lorusso on her property adjacent to Gordon's on May 21.
Lorusso's left leg, right ankle and arm were injured.
Butte County Superior Court Judge Kristen Lucena denied the motions Tuesday, according to Gordon's attorney, Philip Heithecker. He said the judge determined the prosecution's actions were not in bad faith.
Heithecker said the defense will explore appellate rights, particularly if the defendants are convicted.
Gordon and Cambra are both charged with a felony count of allowing a vicious animal at large.
Scherbensky is charged with being an accessory after the fact for allegedly trying to conceal one of the dogs.
The dogs' destruction was at the center of the defense's argument to dismiss the charges. Butte County Animal Control detained the animals after the incident. Two civil court judges separately ruled the dogs were vicious and ordered their destruction.
The defense wanted the animals kept alive for evidence in the criminal case, but the prosecution filed a motion that they wouldn't be kept as evidence.
In criminal court on Aug. 9, Judge William Lamb indicated that the civil court had jurisdiction, but the bodies should be preserved.
The defense argued on Jan. 31 that the bodies were insufficient evidence and cited an expert who stated the dogs needed to be observed interacting with other dogs, their owners and strangers to determine if they were vicious or aggressive.
Another defense motion argued that it was impossible to compare the animals' teeth impressions with photos of the victim's injuries because there was no ruler or scale on the pictures.
Deputy district attorney Kennedy Rizzuto said the evidence in the case included witnesses, videos and the dogs' bodies. She cited an expert who noted monitoring the dogs in custody had no evidentiary value because their behavior typically changes in custody.
The defendants remain out of custody. A trial date has been set for March 25.
(Enterprise-Record - Feb 27, 2013)