Saturday, March 23, 2013

Trial postponed in Palermo dog attack

CALIFORNIA -- Monday's trial date for two of three defendants charged for a dog attack in Palermo was vacated Thursday.

Butte County Superior Court Judge James Reilley continued the trial of Chic Gordon and Theodore Jason Scherbenske after Gordon's attorney, Philip Heithecker, expressed a doubt about Gordon mental competency.

When a doubt is expressed regarding a defendant, the criminal proceedings are suspended until a doctor can perform an evaluation.

The proceedings against a third co-defendant, Ruben Daniel Cambra, were suspended last week when his attorney, Kevin Sears, expressed a doubt.

Cambra and Gordon are each charged with a felony count of allowing a vicious animal at large. Scherbenske is charged with being an accessory after the fact for allegedly attempting to conceal one of the dogs following the incident.

The prosecution alleges two dogs — a pit bull named Gus and a Queensland heeler named Shane — attacked Virginia Lorusso on her property adjacent to Gordon's on May 21. Lorusso suffered injuries to her left leg, right ankle and arm.

On Thursday, Gordon objected to the competency declaration, saying it was a hostile action on Heithecker's part. She again sought to have her court-appointed attorney replaced. Gordon's earlier attempt to do so failed Tuesday.

Cambra also had a hearing to replace Sears on Tuesday, but was denied. He collapsed in court at the end of the day and was taken from the courtroom in a stretcher.

Cambra was not present Thursday.

Scherbenske had sought to replace his court-appointed attorney, Eric Ortner, during a closed-door hearing Thursday, but was denied.

With Scherbenske being the only defendant available for trial, deputy district attorney Kennedy Rizzuto sought the continuance. She said it wouldn't be in the best interests of the victim to put her through two trials.

Ortner did not object.

Reilley set a hearing for Gordon and Scherbenske next Thursday before Judge Kristen Lucena. Gordon objected to Judge Lucena hearing the case because she and the other defendants had requested the judge recuse herself. Lucena has not yet ruled on that request.

All the defendants remain out of custody.

(chicoer.com - March 22, 2013)