High profile murder case could be moved to juvenile court

In November, 64-percent of Californians approved the Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act of 2016, also known as Proposition 57. While much of it focused on cutting taxpayer spending by allowing early parole for some non-violent convicts, part of it also changed the way juveniles go through the court system.

Right now, the Monterey County District Attorney’s Office has four cases that could be impacted by the law. One of them involved the high profile murders of two children found in a plastic storage bin in a storage facility.

Gonzalo Curiel was 17 years old when he was charged with abusing and killing Shaun and Delylah Tara and abusing their older sister. The Monterey County District Attorney’s Office decided to try him as an adult, rather than have him go through the juvenile court system. However, that may change under Prop 57.

“The purpose of the law is just to take the decision away from the district attorneys and make sure a judge is making that decision,” said Berkley Brannon, chief assistant district attorney.

In courtrooms across the state, there’s been confusion as to which cases the new law applies to.

“Whether Prop 57 would just apply to cases that occurred after it went into effect or whether it also applied to cases that were currently pending, the DA has already made a decision. The law wasn’t clear,” Brannon said.

But a newly released 4th District Court of Appeal opinion is setting the stage for the rest of the state. It ruled the law applies to cases where there hasn’t been a final judgement like a conviction and sentencing.

Because Curiel’s case hasn’t even gone to trial, it could be moved and heard in a closed juvebile court proceeding.

“What the court is trying to decide is, does the juvenile court system have the ability to rehabilitate this minor or is this crime so serious or is this minor’s background such that this minor should be treated as an adult,” Brannon said.

Curiel’s former attorney, Jeremy Dzubay, had not taken up the matter but it could be something for the new attorney.

“I think everyone’s in agreement that most recent guidance from the Court of Appeal is that under whatever procedure, this case will have to go back to the juvenile court for the juvenile to make a decision where the trial is going to take place,” Dzubay said.

Brannon said there’s a major difference in sentencing a juvenile versus sentencing an adult. For example, if a minor was convicted of murder in juvenile court, they can only be held up to the age of 25. In adult court, the minimum is 15 years to life.

We reached out to the Santa Cruz County District Attorney’s Office to see how many of its cases will be impacted. We have not heard back.