|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Response to Letter to the Editor by Jim Lawrence re sentencing of Ron Galatolo by Judge Leland Davis
Hola, Jim,
Everyone has a right to express their opinions about the decisions rendered by judges, and to disagree with those decisions, as you have in your letter to the in the RWC Pulse, criticizing what you deem to be a “lenient” sentence imposed by Judge Leland Davis on Ron Galatolo
That being said, judges are required by California law and guidelines to take into consideration several factors when deciding upon appropriate sentences, including but not limited to the circumstances of the crime, the views of the victims, and the individual characteristics of the defendant (first offense, sophistication of the crime, etc.) As well, sentencing is, by law, left to the discretion of the judge. In the case of Ron Galatolo, Judge Davis exercised that discretion and did so lawfully.
Judges are not obligated to and should never impose sentences that always follow the recommendations of prosecutors. The judicial obligation is to impose sentences that are lawful and to do so in an independent and unbiased fashion. Had Judge Davis’s decision to impose incarceration in jail, rather than in prison, been unlawful, the prosecutor has the right to appeal that sentence. There will be no appeal because Judge Davis did nothing improper or unlawful. Indeed, the San Mateo County District Attorney, Steve Wagstaffe, commented after the sentencing, “[Galatolo] is going to be wearing an orange jumpsuit. He is going to know he is being punished. . . Today we got justice.”
Finally, when you question whether Judge Davis might have imposed a harsher sentence had Mr. Galatolo been African American, you attribute racial bias to Judge Davis, and you do so without any facts. Casting implications of racism toward anyone, let alone a judge, because you dislike his sentence is unfortunate and unfair.
Judge LaDoris Cordell




