Another trial will be scheduled for Raul Manuel Magallanez, who was convicted in August 2007 of multiple counts of sex crimes against girls 14 and 15 years of age.
Lyon County Attorney Marc Goodman, who prosecuted the case, talked briefly this morning about the Kansas Supreme Court’s overturning the majority of the convictions in the case.
Goodman talked by phone from the airport in Atlanta, where he was waiting for a flight. He had been notified of the decision by the Supreme Court on Thursday afternoon, but had not yet read a copy of the 28-page opinion.
“We’re just going to retry it,” Goodman said. “As to their grounds, without reading it, I can’t comment on that. ...”
The court wrote that District Judge Lee Fowler had given “limiting instruction” on evidence that was admitted that tended to prove that the defendant committed crimes other than the crimes that were charged. Magallanez’s attorneys did not object at the time, but incorporated that objection into the appeal to the higher court.
For the complete story see the Gazette print edition or the online print edition at http://www.emporiagazette.com/pdf. To subscribe to the print edition or the online print edition go to http://www.emporiagazette.com/subscribe.
former_emporian (anonymous) says...
What a crock! This guy must have somone new to snitch on. I pray the jury convicts him again.
July 16, 2010 at 12:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
hottopics (anonymous) says...
He must be hoping to get out on bail while the trial proceeds and hopes to get lesser charges, less jail time while wasting time in our courts. Think about it. What else does he have to do right now, he is in jail.
July 16, 2010 at 3:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
Thanks for the info Farm Raised. I agree with you, that is a stretch.
Well, here we go again. This is hard to accept in view of limited resources of the courts. Dang!
I doubt he'll be out on bail for a new trial. Besides, he's a definite flight risk, that's what I'd argue.
July 16, 2010 at 3:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Landa (anonymous) says...
we have to remember that the girls this guy was sleeping with were NOT 12 or 13...they were 15 and 16...they knew right from wrong...they should be charged with prostitution. they were giving him sex for beer. When you're driving over to the guy's house and getting beer for sex (which you and all your friends think is funny)- are you really a victim?
July 16, 2010 at 4:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
I sort of see what you mean, Landa, but the fact remains, they were minors and he was having sex with minors. He is the adult and he chose to have sex with them. The law assumes that an adult knows better and knows the law. He didn't give a rat's behind how old they were.
I'd love for his attorney to argue that he was giving them beer for sex. There's the noose around his neck.
My other thought is this: Since the conviction is overturned, does that mean he can now go free until he is once more arrested and re-tried?
Good grief, now they're going to have to find a jury again.
July 16, 2010 at 5:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bmlynar (Bobbi Mlynar) says...
Just for clarification of Magallanez's charges, since the full story is not posted online, the girls were 13, 14, and 15.
In addition to the rape of the 13-year-old, Magallanez also was found guilty of 14 counts of rape involving girls 14 and 15 years of age, 22 counts of furnishing alcohol with illicit intent to minors, four counts of aggravated criminal sodomy, one count of indecent solicitation of a child, two counts of sexual exploitation of a child, six counts of aggravated indecent liberties with a child and one count of aggravated intimidation of a witness.
July 18, 2010 at 6:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
EmporiaRocks (anonymous) says...
NEW TWIST IN MAGALLANEZ CASE: PLEA WITHDRAWAL
By the KVOE News Department
Raul Magallanez was supposed to be sentenced again for child sex crimes Friday – albeit a much shorter list than when he was convicted of over 60 counts of sex abuse in 2007. However, there was a twist at his sentencing hearing Friday.
Instead of making a sentencing statement, Magallanez requested to file a motion to withdraw his no contest plea on two counts of aggravated indecent liberties. Lyon County District Judge Lee Fowler granted the request and set a motions hearing date of Feb. 18 at 3:30 p.m. to determine whether to actually allow the withdrawal.
Magallanez was first charged in 2006 with over 60 counts of sex abuse including rape, aggravated criminal sodomy, aggravated indecent liberties, sexual exploitation and furnishing alcohol to minors. A Lyon County jury convicted him of over 50 counts in 2007, but the Kansas Court of Appeals reversed the verdicts last year -- citing cumulative procedural errors through the original trial.
Magallanez was supposed to be retried, but he pleaded no contest and was subsequently found guilty of two counts of aggravated indecent liberties after an alleged victim died.
February 9, 2011 at 2:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
EmporiaRocks (anonymous) says...
So...has this guy been out since August awaiting his new trial?
http://www.doc.ks.gov/kasper/offender......
February 9, 2011 at 2:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
Looks that way, doesn't it. Don't forget, Community Corrections has officers who perform intensive supervision on people like this.
February 9, 2011 at 3:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
marko (anonymous) says...
uhm if he is awaiting trial he wouldnt be in DOC unless serving some other sentence
February 9, 2011 at 3:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
EmporiaRocks (anonymous) says...
Yeah...I don't know what that means. I'm not real familiar with the courts. That is why I ask. So, is he free to roam the streets while this gets resolved? Is he in county jail? What?
February 9, 2011 at 4:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
Parents of teenage tramps shouldn't allow them to run the streets like feral cats. How could a parent not know that their child is drinking alcohol and having sex with the pervert down the street? I'll tell you how. The parents don't give a $#!+ until it makes the paper.
If I suspected the pervert down the street was trying to influence my child to use drugs or have sex there wouldn't be no freaking appeals. Just a story in the paper about a man who was found dead in his home.
February 9, 2011 at 4:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
EmporiaRocks (anonymous) says...
I would say that it has been a while since you have lived with a teenage girl.
February 9, 2011 at 4:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
EmporiaRocks, If that remark was for me, you don't know me at all. I refuse to allow latchkey children in my home. I am against the practice. I believe there should be laws mandating adult supervision of minors. If they need a parent's signature to enlist in the military then they need adult supervision at all times. jmo
February 9, 2011 at 4:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
EmporiaRocks (anonymous) says...
You are right. I don't know you or your life. I was under the impression, from your previous comments, that you are older and your children are grown and out of the house.
February 9, 2011 at 4:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
I am old. My children are on their own. But, as long as I am alive, if anybody harms them a defense attorney will have to decide if their client will be protected in a prison or buried in a graveyard. Sure, they might bond out and try to hide but I'll be listening to this song as I'm hunting them down.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxvlKp...
February 9, 2011 at 6:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )