In front of Department 3 – Vanguard with the Jennifer Mouzis Council, Peggy Dev, Sanjay Dev and Ajay’s parents.
Forest, CA – In an impressive reversal, the Judge of the Superior Court of Yolo County, Janene Beronio, gave Ajay De Devy Dev on Friday, annuling her 2009 sentence for sexually assaulting her adopted daughter. Dev, who has always maintained his innocence, had been sentenced to an extraordinary 378 years and four months. A bail audience is scheduled for next Friday, and it is expected that DEV will be released pending that result.
This decision marks the end of an exhausting probative audience of years that began in 2018 and faced delays due to changing council, the COVID-19 pandemic and the challenges to ensure witnesses. Jennifer Mouzis, the current Dev lawyer, and Steve Mount, the original prosecutor who came out of retirement for the case delivered final arguments last month, the original prosecutor who left retirement for the case.
In its detailed ruling from the bank, Judge Baronio pointed out the legal standard that guides his decision: Yes, for a preponderance of the evidence, the original trial failed to deliver a fair and fair result.
The most critical factor, he ruled, was the failure of Dev’s trial lawyer to authenticate Nepal’s official records, indicating that the alleged victim, Sapna Dev, had falsified his birth certificate to obtain immigration benefits. This failure caused the key evidence to be inadmissible and, if the right age had been used, there would be invalidated at least a dozen positions linked to the sexual behavior of minors.
Judge Baronio concluded that Dev’s litigating lawyer render constitutionally poor performance, which was equivalent to an ineffective assistance of the lawyer.
He also reviewed new tests of multiple witnesses who testified that Sapna had manufactured the accusations after a family dispute. The judge dismissed the prosecution claims of witnesses, stating that there was no evidence of any conspiracy or misconduct by the defense.
While he found a defense witness who lacked credibility, he determined that two others, who corroborated independently, were «credible, reliable and not tumulative.» One described a scare of pregnancy that undermined Sapna’s claims of repeated sexual aggressions without protection, while another said Sapna admitting that she had lied after being cut by the will of Dev and sent back to Nepal.
On the crucial issue of the pretext call, long in the hands of the Prosecutor’s Office as an implicit confession, Judge Baronio was unequivocal. She said the recording had never improved or clarified properly. Once it was, the call did not reveal sexual content or admission of guilt.
«At the end of the call,» he said, «it was clear that Sapna did not believe he had received confession.»
The court determined that allowing Sapna to characterize the call as a confession was equivalent to the presentation of a false testimony, and the defense failure of improving the tape demonstrated an ineffective assistance.
Ajay Dev statement
After the ruling, the following written statement was given to the Davis Vanguardwho prepared for the judge’s ruling and not read aloud in the Court:
«First, I want to thank his honor for his patience, diligence, equity and perseverance in the last six years during this probative hearing.»
«I am deeply grateful to my lawyer, Jennifer Mouzis, for entering this complex medium audition case. She believed in my innocence and has fought tirelessly in my name.»
«For my family, my friends and everyone who supported me, even traveling from all over the country, thanks for your unwavering support.»
«For my older parents: your unconditional love supported me. For my two children: you are the true innocent victims in this case. I have missed you every day and I can’t wait to return home.»
«I have no hatred towards Sapna. I pray for his peace. I also have no bad will towards the prosecutor. Ira and hate consume the soul; forgiveness and compassion are the values that my parents instilled in me. I choose their way.»
Legal background and refutation of the Dev lawyer
During the final arguments, Mouzis argued that Dev’s trial had been irreparably defective. She cited changes in the California Law, specifically SB 97, which reduced the threshold for the relief of habit according to new evidence. The appropriate legal standard is now if the new evidence is «sufficiently material and credible that it is more likely that the result of the case has changed.»
Mouzis strongly refuted the prosecution accusations that she and other lawyers, including the appeal expert, Cliff Gardner, were involved in a conspiracy. He accused the State of resorting to accusations without foundation not only against lawyers but also family members, community supporters and even press figures associated with the case of DEV.
«Each individual who has supported Mr. Dev is accused of lying,» Mouzis said. «But they do not bring evidence, only paranoia. Its position is transactional: if a fact supports the conviction, it is true; if it supports innocence, it must be false.»
She highlighted the inconsistency in the treatment of the Prosecutor’s Office of Michael Rothschild, the original devigating lawyer of DEV, which alternately predicted it as competent and forgetful, depending on which argument will benefit his case. Mouzis also criticized the day to invoke cultural bias and rule out the valid testimony of Nepali witnesses simply for their national origin or family ties.
Among the witnesses attacked by the Prosecutor’s Office were a retired director, Bhabendra Yadav, and the Schweta Deo school teacher, of which he testified that Sapna had privately admitted the manufacture of the accusations. Mouzis said that the prosecutor’s office, which routinely pays for the trips of the witnesses, tried to discredit these witnesses only because their trip to testify was funded by the defense.
Mouzis concluded when he urge the court to consider the overwhelming weight of the evidence that points to the innocence of DEV, not only the failures of the litigating lawyer, but the subsequent efforts of the State to preserve a conviction at all costs.
Judge Baronio scheduled a bail hearing for Friday, May 23, where the Devic Defense will advocate for his liberation in his own recognition (O). Although the district prosecutor can try to try again or appeal the habit ruling, such movements seem unlikely given the strength of the judge’s conclusions and the evidence identified.
«I think he can be innocent,» Judge Baronio said in court, indicating that he was not willing to keep Dev in custody awaiting other procedures.
Categories:
Breaking News Court Mira Vanguard Court looks at Yolo County
Tags:
Ajay Dev Davis Vanguard Jennifer Mouzis Judge Janene Beronio Nepal Sapna Dev SB 97 Steve Mount Woodland, CA Unjust Condition of Yolo County County County County Superior Court
