California officer admits to sexual assault while on duty

[traditional_woman]

I think from now on, whenever a male cop pulls her over for anything, a lump will form in her throat. I don't blame her. I wonder if there are others?!

A former California police officer accused of sexually assaulting a motorist during a traffic stop pleaded guilty in federal court, federal prosecutors said Friday.
Federal prosecutors charged Feliciano Sanchez with deprivation of rights under color of law.

Federal prosecutors charged Feliciano Sanchez with deprivation of rights under color of law.

Feliciano Sanchez, 34, admitted in court Thursday that while on duty on May 16, 2007, he pulled over a female driver in a traffic stop and forced her to perform oral sex on him, according to a news release from U.S. Attorney Thomas O'Brien, who heads the office for the Central District.

Sanchez, then of Los Angeles County's Bell Police Department, stopped the woman for speeding or weaving down the road, said central California U.S. attorney spokesman Thom Mrozek, citing court documents.

After learning the woman, identified as R.H. in court documents, did not have a driver's license with her, Sanchez told her he suspected her of drinking and her car would be towed, Mrozek said.

Sanchez offered to drive R.H. to her job, but instead drove her to the parking lot of an auto repair outlet in Bell, Mrozek said.

Sanchez placed his hand on his gun and forced her to perform sex on him in his patrol car, Mrozek said. Afterward, Sanchez drove R.H. to her work place, Mrozek said.

"Officer Sanchez brutalized a person he had sworn to serve," O'Brien said in the release. "As a result of his criminal conduct, Mr. Sanchez now faces a substantial amount of time in federal prison. His conduct eroded public confidence in law enforcement and cast a pall over his former colleagues who obey the law, proudly working to preserve public safety."

Federal prosecutors charged Sanchez with a civil rights violation, according to the release.

The crime carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison upon sentencing. Sanchez has been held without bond since his arrest in May 2007, Mrozek said. Sanchez's sentencing is scheduled for November 18.

Sanchez resigned as an officer after his indictment, Bell Police Department Capt. Anthony Miranda said. Miranda said Sanchez's case was a first for the department.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/07/17/officer.sex.assault/index.html

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

Federal prosecutors charged Feliciano Sanchez with deprivation of rights under color of law.

Only 10 years? This was kidnapping and sexual assault. I'd think that the penalty for those would be greater than 10 years, so why charge him with "deprivation of rights"?

[DLaw911]

Only 10 years? This was kidnapping and sexual assault. I'd think that the penalty for those would be greater than 10 years, so why charge him with "deprivation of rights"?EDITED---I pulled the court records of the case. There was a trial held on this matter that ended up in a mistrial/hung jury on 4/1/09. Apparently there were come credibility issues with the complaining witness concerning all the facts alleged.

The former officer pled to a single count of 18 USC 242:
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
He also admitted placing his hand on his gun (thus "use" of the firearm). The plea agreement is a little strange because it states a statutory maximum of 10 years, but then goes on to mention the total offense level of 37 which translates to sentencing range of 210-262 months. So the use of the firearm is an enhancement to the 10 years. The judge must consider the sentencing guidelines but is free to sentence up to the maximum.

[notluzn]

:(

[F9thRet]

Start shooting rapist via the state and this would put an end to any kind of time served discussion.

Stephen

[Panhead0422]

Only 10 years? This was kidnapping and sexual assault. I'd think that the penalty for those would be greater than 10 years, so why charge him with "deprivation of rights"?

Because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT does not have jurisdiction on the sexual assault or the kidnapping charge unless the sexual assault occurs on federal property or crosses state or federal boundaries. The same applies to the kidnapping charge. Of course I am willing to bet that they were asked for assistance and advice. What I do not understand is why the state of California did not did not prosecute him for those crimes. I did not read Dlaws information until after I posted this.

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

EDITED---I pulled the court records of the case. There was a trial held on this matter that ended up in a mistrial/hung jury on 4/1/09. Apparently there were come credibility issues with the complaining witness concerning all the facts alleged.

The former officer pled to a single count of 18 USC 242:

He also admitted placing his hand on his gun (thus "use" of the firearm). The plea agreement is a little strange because it states a statutory maximum of 10 years, but then goes on to mention the total offense level of 37 which translates to sentencing range of 210-262 months. So the use of the firearm is an enhancement to the 10 years. The judge must consider the sentencing guidelines but is free to sentence up to the maximum.

Ah ok. That makes sense now. Thanks.

[DLaw911]

Because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT does not have jurisdiction on the sexual assault or the kidnapping charge unless the sexual assault occurs on federal property or crosses state or federal boundaries. The same applies to the kidnapping charge. Of course I am willing to bet that they were asked for assistance and advice. What I do not understand is why the state of California did not did not prosecute him for those crimes. I did not read Dlaws information until after I posted this.You are wrong about federal property, etc. The issue is the crime occurred withing the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. Just for interest that jurisdiction can extend all the way to the airspace about other nations (in certain factual situations).

The crime was investigated by the FBI and the feds decided to prosecute BECAUSE the possible penalty would be more severe. That, of course, had they obtained a conviction of the original charge which would have carried a possible life sentence. But the jury hung and the US Attorney gave a plea bargain to a lesser charge that only carries a 10 year max. That suggests the crime DID occur but the victim might have embellished, or was inconsistent in her statements about some of the facts.

But, yes, the State DID have original jurisdiction over the matter. In fact the former officer could have been prosecuted in BOTH courts.

[DLaw911]

Start shooting rapist via the state and this would put an end to any kind of time served discussion.

StephenHe wasn't charged with rape.