As jurors continue deliberations in the Michael Rodrigues rape
trial, defense attorney Art Cantu indicated today he would pursue
some sort of appeal if there is a conviction, while the defendant
faces several potential sentences depending on where the jury comes
down on the nine felony counts.
As jurors continue deliberations in the Michael Rodrigues rape trial, defense attorney Art Cantu indicated today he would pursue some sort of appeal if there is a conviction, while the defendant faces several potential sentences depending on where the jury comes down on the nine felony counts.
Cantu in commenting on the case – the closing arguments of which ended Wednesday – hinted there was a “very egregious error committed” but he declined to elaborate other than to say there will be a finding “sooner or later.”
“I’m convinced that sooner or later, there will be a finding that it was an irreparable error,” said Cantu, who added he would take an appeal to a higher court to settle his undisclosed allegation.
Jurors entered deliberations in the case Wednesday around noon and they were excused at 4:30 p.m. before returning this morning to continue. The judge then excused jurors this afternoon. Deliberations will head into a third day on Friday.
After declining to “go any further” on the matter, Cantu confirmed the potential sentencing scenarios Rodrigues faces if he is convicted. Rodrigues, 48, is accused or raping four women between 1999 and 2007.
If convicted of one rape offense, the penal code calls for a sentence of three, six or eight years in state prison, and the precise number depends on whether there were aggravating or mitigating circumstances.
Under what’s called the “one-strike law,” however, two convictions of the same sex offense would elevate his exposure to 15 years to life in state prison.
Deputy District Attorney Patrick Palacios did not immediately return a phone call before publication.
Editor’s note: In Part 2 of this series of videos covering the closing statements in the Michael Rodrigues rape trial, portions of arguments over the testimony of Jane Doe 1 are shown. She was the first accuser who alleged the defendant raped her twice, in 1999 and 2000.
