By Joe Nelson, Staff Writer
November 1, 2012
Printed version
The state 4th District Court of Appeal in Riverside on Wednesday rejected a request by prosecutors to reinstate bribery charges against a Rancho Cucamonga developer that were dropped by a San Bernardino Superior Court judge last year.
Rancho Cucamonga developer Jeff Burum and three former county officials face felony charges in a sweeping San Bernardino County corruption case in which prosecutors allege the four engaged in bribery and conspiracy to influence a $102 million legal settlement between the county and Colonies Partners LP in November 2006.
Also charged in the case are former county supervisor Paul Biane, former Assistant Assessor Jim Erwin and Mark Kirk, former chief of staff for Supervisor Gary Ovitt.
All four defendants deny any wrongdoing.
In its 41-page decision, the appellate court rejected an appeal by prosecutors to reinstate four bribery charges against Burum that Superior Court Judge Brian McCarville dismissed in August 2011. McCarville determined that people accused of giving bribes cannot also be charged with aiding and abetting the receipt of bribes.
Prosecutors argued in their appeal that the law contains no such exemption, that the facts should determine whether such charges are warranted.
The higher court did not support that argument.
In a statement Wednesday, Burum’s attorney Stephen Larson, said that although he appreciates the higher court’s decision to affirm McCarville’s dismissal of all bribery charges and a conflict-of-interest charge against his client, he said he looks forward to fighting the remaining two charges at trial.
“We look forward to exposing the miscarriage of justice that has been levied on Jeff Burum and his family,” Larson said. “As we have said numerous times, there was no bribe, and the charges against Jeff are an irresponsible and politically motivated attempt to trample on his First Amendment rights.”
Prosecutors also requested in their appeal that a charge of misappropriation of public funds against Biane, Kirk and Erwin that was dropped by McCarville be reinstated. The appellate court granted that request, saying McCarville erred when he dismissed those chrges.
Justice Art W. McKinster, who wrote the court’s opinion, also said McCarville erred when he refused to dismiss a conflict-of-interest charge against Erwin and Burum and two charges against Erwinalleging that he aided and abetted Biane in committing bribery.
Readers can follow the entire story in the Thursday print edition of The Sun.
HA HA HA…..How did he win? The article says that he still has two charges on him which indicates that the appellate court recognizes a measure of wrongdoing on his part. Sorry Administrator, but in the words of the great Chris Matthews, you cannot let your wishes be the father to your reality
Red,
Why not?
Anon,
You don’t think it’s a victory. Five out of seven counts dismissed and the case gutted. All bribery charges dismissed on demure?
Even Ramos himself would and did say say this is a major setback.
The two remaining counts are by far the weakest. Charging a private person with a crime meant for public employee’s is going to be beyond a challenge.
It doesn’t matter whose side your on, this case is severely damaged. The only person happier than Steven Larson is Jeff Burum.
Red Anon,
I don’t think you’ll be too happy with the next court actions.
Brace yourself……
So now we wait and see if the DA’s ego will take this to the Supreme Court in order to keep his obvious political grandstanding going. Hmmm 10 Million in bail to zero and 7 counts to 5. Enough already – put on your case and let the jury tell the world how incompetant the prosecuters office is. Oh and for all those nay sayers just what do you think happened to that FBI investigation – I cerntainly haven’t heard that the US Attorney General has jumped into the game…
Burum’s mug shot on the cover of a SEBA mailers? HA HA HA, sounds like a real big win to me. If that flyer had anything good to say it wouldn’t have used his mug shot. Apparently the appellate court found some validity to the charges because they did not drop them all. This is contrary to the assumption of many of this site that said the charges were trumped up. It’s safe to say that those assumptions are wrong considering that the court is privy to more info then anyone on this site.