VENTURA

SUPERIOF~ COURT
FILED
3 JU~)J) 2010
~H~D,~ET
5 BY:7 ~~~‘~puty
6

8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

9 FOR THE COUNTY OF VENTURA
10

11
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ) Case No.: 2008005782
12 CALIFORNIA, )
13 ) DECLARATION OF CHARLES W.
Plaintiff, ) CAMPBELL, JR.
14 vs. )
15 BRANDON McINERNEY, ))
16 )
Defendant. )
17

18 I, Charles W. Campbell, Jr., declare that I have personal knowledge of the following, and
19 if called to testify, could and would testify to the matters contained herein.
20 1. I am the judge assigned to handle the trial of Brandon Mclnerney.
21 2. Before July 14, 2010 I had never had any contact with defense counsel in this
22 case.
23 3. On July 14, 2010 I was informed that defense counsel had filed a motion to
24 continue the trial. The motion to continue is attached as Exhibit “A”. In support of that motion
25 they filed declarations and a declaration was filed by their investigator under seal. The
26 investigator’s declaration is attached as Exhibit “B”. It will only be sent to the judge who is
27 assigned to rule on this disqualification.
28

2008005782 PEOPLE v. McINERNEY Page 1

 4. The People filed an opposition to the defense motion to continue. The opposition
2 is attached as Exhibit “C”.
3 5. I read all of the documents filed in support of or in opposition to the motion to
4 continue.
5 6. After reading the documents, I was informed by my bailiff that defense counsel
6 wanted to speak with me in chambers.
7 7. Defense Counsel, the prosecutor and her investigator came into chambers and
8 defense counsel introduced themselves to me.
9 8. Defense counsel then began to explain to me why they needed a continuance.
10 9. After listening to them for a while I stated that this discussion needed to be on the
ii record because any decision I would make was subject to review.
12 10. I deny that I am prejudiced or biased against or for any of the counsel or parties in
13 this case.
14 11. I have attached a transcript of the proceedings from July 14, 2010; I believe the
15 record speaks for itself as to what transpired, so I will not summarize the proceedings. The
16 transcript is labeled Exhibit “D”.
17 12. I deny that I had formed any opinion as to how I would rule on the motion to
18 continue before the motion was heard.
19 I declare under penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct pursuant to the laws
20 of the State of California.
21

22

23
Executed this 20th day of July, 2010 at Ventura, Cpiif4ia.

CHARLES W. C~MP~J~L, JR.

/
24 Judge of the Superior ~c≤urt
25

26

27

28

2008005782 PEOPLE V. McINERNEY Page 2

 1 Scott S. Wippert, SBN 213528
1050 Esplanade vENruf~
2 Chico, CA 95926 SUP~f $1
(530) 961-3616
3
Law Office of Robyn B. Bramson
4 Robyn Bramson, SBN 234888
14431 Ventura Blvd., Suite 229
5 Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
(916) 505-2666 ty
6
Attorneys for BRANDON McINERNEY
7

9
10 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
11 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF VENTURA
12 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ) Case No.: 2008005782
CALIFORNIA, )
13 )
Plaintiff, ) MOTION TO CONTINUE (Pen. C. §1050)
14 ))
15
v. \~A1~3~ ~
BRANDON McINERNEY
)) DAT :Jul ,2010 ~
TIME: 8:30a.m.
16 ) DEPARTMENT:21 )3
Defendant )
17

18 TO THE ABOVE ENTITLED COURT AND TO THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR

19 THE COUNTY OF VENTURA:
20 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT on July 6,2010 in Department 27 of the Ventura
21 County Superior Court, at 8:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, defendant
22 Brandon Mclnerney, by and through his attorney, Scott Wippert, will move this Court to
23 continue his trial, currently scheduled to being on July 14th, to a later date. The factual basis for
24 this motion is set forth in the attached Declaration of Scott Wippert. The motion will be based
25 on this written notice and motion, the legal authority of Penal Code section 1050, the attached
26 declaration, and any other law and argument to be provided at the hearing on this matter.
27

28

—1..
S nr~rnwrnT Inn IfllLT’T,TSTT III ~fl - -- tI 04 ann
 1 Dated: June 29, 2010 Respectfully Submitted,
2

Scott Wippert ~
4 Attorney at Law

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27 DECLARATION OF SCOTT WIPPERT

28
 1 1, Scott Wippert, declare I have personal knowledge of the following, and if called upon

2 to do so, could and would testify competently to the matters contained herein.

3 1. I am counsel of record for the Defendant, Brandon Mclnemey and am lead trial counsel
4 with regard to his case.

5 2. The trial in this matter is currently scheduled to begin on July 14, 2010.

6 3. My investigator is still in the process of interviewing witnesses for purposes of preparing

7 and presenting a defense.

8 4. I am informed by my investigator that she has encountered difficulty contacting various

9 student witnesses due to school currently being out of session and many kids being out of town
10 during the Summer vacation.

11 5. These student witnesses are essential to preparing and presenting a defense in Brandon’ s

12 case.

13 6. Without these witnesses I would be ineffective as Brandon’s counsel.

14 7. Additionally, I have still not received reports from expert witnesses retained in this

15 matter.

16 I declare the above is true and correct under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the

17 State of California. Executed this 28th day of June, 2010, at Chico, California.

18

19 Scott Wippert

20 Attorney at Law

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28
 PROOF OF SERVICE

I, Robyn Bramson, declare at the time of service I was at least 18 years of age and
not a party to the legal action. My business address is 14431 Ventura Boulevard, Suite
229, Sherman Oaks, CA 91423. My telephone number is 916-505-2666.
I served a copy of the MOTION TO CONTINUE, on June 29, 2010, via service
by mail as follows:

Ventura County District Attorney

800 South Victoria Avenue
#314
Ventura, CA 93009

I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 29th day of June, 2010.
 1 GREGORY D. TOTTEN
District Attorney VENTURA
SUPERIOR COURT
2 [~4aeve J. Fox (SBN 137325)
Deputy District Attorney FILED
3 800 South Victoria Avenue
Ventura, CA 93009
4
Telephone (805) 654—2716
5
Attorney for Plaintiff
6

8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF VENTURA

10 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,) COURT NO. 2008005782

)
11 Plaintiff, ) PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION
TO DEFENSE MOTION TO
12 CONTINUE PER
) PENAL CODE SECTION
13 1050; DECLARATION OF
V MAEVE J. FOX
14 )
)
15 )
BRANDON McINEPNEY, )
16 ) Date: July 7, 2010
Defendant. ) Time: 8:30 am
17 Courtroom: 13
18

19 TO THE ABOVE ENTITLED COURT, DEFENDANT BRANDON

20 McINERNEY AND HIS COUNSEL OF RECORD: Plaintiff submits the
21 following in opposition to defense counsel’s motion to continue
22 dated June 29, 2010.
23
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS J~JND AUTHORITIES
24

25 I.
PENAL CODE SECTION 1050 REQUIRES GOOD CAUSE
26 FOR THE GRANTING OF A CONTINUANCE
27 Penal Code section 1050 requires that the Court find good
28
—1—

PEOPLE’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO cONTINUE; POINTS AND AUTHORITIES;

DECLARAT ION
 1 cause for granting a continuance. It reads in pertinent part, as

2 follows:

3 (g) (1) When deciding whether or not good

cause for a continuance has been shown, the
4 court shall consider the general convenience
and prior commitments of all witnesses,
5 including peace officers. Both the general
convenience and prior commitments of each
6 witness also shall be considered in
selecting a continuance date if the motion
7 is granted. The facts as to inconvenience or
prior commitments may be offered by the
8 witness or by a party to the case.

9
Both parties have a right to a fair trial and the People
10
submit that the People’s right to a fair trial is being
11
jeopardized by the endless requests to continue being made by
12
defendant in this case.
13
Keeping over 50 witnesses under subpoena and on-call is
14
becoming virtually impossible and the People fear that witnesses
15
may start becoming non-responsive after so many continuances,
16
not to mention the stress that it is putting on the individual
17
witnesses each and every time they are served.
18
The People respectfully request this court to deny any
19
further requests to continue this case and that the court order
20
counsel to present himself ready for trial on the ~ of July.
21

22 Respectfully submitted,

23 GREGORY D. TOTTEN, District Attorney

-‘Gounty o Ventura, State of California

DATED ~~ 2b ~ _________________________________
Deputy District At orney
27

28 —2—

PEOPLE’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO CONTINUE; POINTS AND AUTHORITIES;

DECLARATION
1 DECLARATION OF MAEVE 3. FOX

2 I, Maeve J. Fox, declare as follows:

3 1. I am attorney at law licensed to practice before all the
4 courts of the State of California. I am employed by the

5 District Attorney for the County of Ventura and have been

6 for over 20 years. I am the assigned prosecutor for the
7 case of the State of California versus Brandon Mclnerney,

8 2008005782.
9 2. The defendant in this case is charged with murder in
10 violation of Penal Code section 187(a) for the February 12,
11 2008 execution-style shooting of classmate Larry King. The
12 case is now over 2~ years old. Defense counsel substituted
13 into this case in late September 2008 and has had almost
14 two full years to prepare.
15 3. When defense counsel substituted into the case, the Public
16 Defender’s Office was ordered by the court to provide to
17 counsel the discovery which the People had provided to the

18 Public Defender. Then, approximately one year after counsel

19 came in to the case, counsel made a request for the entire

20 discovery file, at which time my office re—supplied three

21 thousand some-odd pages of discovery and all the recordings

22 to counsel again.

23 4. Counsel now comes forward claiming that he is having

24 trouble locating “student witnesses” for interviews as it

25 is summer vacation. We are within TEN DAYS of the trial

26 date. The discovery in this case clearly shows that EVERY

27 SINGLE student at E.O. Green Elementary School who was

28 3

PEOPLE’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO CONTINUE; POINTS AND AUTHORITIES;

DECLARATION
 1 present on the day of the murder was interviewed, at least~
2 in a cursory fashion, on that day.
3 5. Since then, the People have conducted extensive re

4 interviews with the students and faculty that had

5 information relevant to the murder. All of that information

6 has been discovered to the defense. Thus defense counsel
7 has the addresses and phone numbers of all of the people

8 that his investigator supposedly cannot locate and has had

9 this material in his possession the entire time.

10 6. Counsel has not set forth any good faith belief in his
11 declaration that the unspecified witnesses he claims not to

12 be able to locate have any information that is either

13 exculpatory or mitigating. The People have a large number
14 of the People to whom I assume counsel refers, under
15 subpoena for the trial.

16 7. The People have been forced to keep approximately 50

17 witnesses, including all the minors to whom counsel refers,
18 under subpoena for roughly a year in anticipation this

19 trial. This is an EXTREME inconvenience for the ordinary

20 citizens who were forced to witness the defendant’s

21 depraved act as well as for their parents, and all the

22 adult civilian and professional witnesses as well. Summer

23 time is the ideal time to get this case to trial given the

24 fact that many of the witnesses are in fact minors and will

25 not have to be pulled out of school in order to testify.

26 8. The court docket indicates that counsel obtained funds for

27 investigation at the time they substituted into the case in

28 —4—

PEOPLE’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO CONTINUE; POINTS AND AUTHORITIES;

DEC LARAT ION
 1 2008 and additional funds were granted for the hiring of an
2 “expert psychologist” in this case back in February of

3 2010. The people have not received one single page of

4 discovery on any topic from the defense in this case which

5 at this time puts them in violation of their reciprocal

6 discovery obligations under Penal Code sections 1054 et
7 seq.

8 9. However, of more moment than the fact that counsel is in

9 clear violation of his discovery obligation is the fact

10 that his lack of compliance with his discovery ob1igations~
11 indicate to this court that counsel has uncovered NO

12 EVIDENCE of exculpatory or mitigating material which could

13 affect the outcome of the trial. Now is not the time to be

14 attempting to locate and interview witnesses, now is the
15 time to be cross—examining witnesses. There has been no
16 showing of good cause to continue this case. The court is

17 obligated to deny the request.

18
19 I declare that the above is true and correct under the

20 penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the State of

21. California and that this declaration was executed this ~day

22 of July, 2010 at Ventura, California.

23

24

25

26

27

28 5

PEOPLE’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO CONTINUE; POINTS AND AUTHORITIES;

DECLARATION
 PROOF OF SERVICE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF VENTURA )

I, Pamela Potter, say that:

I am a citizen of the United States, over the age of 18 years, a resident of the

County of Ventura, and am not a party to the above-entitled action; my business address

is 800 South Victoria Avenue, Ventura, California; on July 2, 2010, 1 served the

within PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENSE MOTION TO CONTINUE

PER PENAL CODE SECTION 1050; DECLARATION OFMAEVE J. FOX

enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid in the United States mail

at Ventura, California, addressed as follows:

SCOTT WIPPERT ROBYN BRAMSON

Attorney at Law Attorney at Law
1050 Esplanade 14431 Ventura Blvd., Suite 229
Chico, CA 95926 Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
Fax # (530) 223-5200 Fax # (818) 783-9469

and by facsimile transmission to the numbers listed above.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on July 1, 2010, at Ventura, California.

~ ~J~J
Pamela Potter