Judge Sees Ample Evidence for Ortiz to Stand Trial

Former San Diego County Registrar Ray Ortiz and two co-defendants, accused of stealing public funds by manipulating a county printing contract, were ordered Friday to stand trial on all the charges in a 27-count felony indictment.

“Mr. Ortiz and the other parties involved in the various transactions set about, in sometimes a very devious way and an obtuse way, to utilize county funds for their own use,” San Diego Municipal Judge Nicholas Kasimatis said in declaring there was sufficient evidence for a trial in Superior Court.

“What Mr. Ortiz and the other defendants did in this case was they decided how to spend county money,” Kasimatis ruled at the end of a weeklong preliminary hearing for Ortiz, his longtime friend Maria Caldera, and election consultant Lance Gough. “And as a county officer, that’s not his prerogative.”

Ortiz and his attorney, Merle Schneidewind, said after Kasimatis announced his decision that they had never expected the charges to be dismissed. But they renewed their allegation that the prosecution’s key witness lied in his testimony, and Ortiz said he is confident that he will be acquitted at trial.

“We’ve heard the best the district attorney has,” he said. “From what I’ve seen, I’m optimistic.”

Ortiz said he would not entertain any offer from prosecutors of a plea bargain.

He is accused of grand theft, misappropriation of public funds and other charges in the alleged misuse of a county contract with Jeffries Printing Co. of Los Angeles to cover up thousands of dollars in unrelated expenses--mainly trips by Ortiz, his wife and friends, and employees of the registrar’s office to meetings of elections officials. Caldera is charged with three counts of grand theft and Gough faces a single charge of grand theft.

Kasimatis ordered all three to appear Jan. 30 for arraignment in Superior Court.

In his closing argument Friday, Schneidewind said prosecutors had no proof, beyond the testimony of Jeffries salesman Lynn Kienle, that Ortiz knew charges unrelated to Jeffries’ sample ballot printing contract were being passed along to the county as contract costs.

He argued that Kienle, who was granted immunity from prosecution for his testimony, covered up bill-padding and other improprieties by claiming that Ortiz directed him to submit false invoices to the county.

“He, if anybody, was the wrongdoer,” Schneidewind said.

It was premature, he added, for Ortiz and his co-defendants to be facing prosecution, because county auditors have not concluded a review of the allegedly improper billings by Jeffries.

“They’re still trying to find out if Mr. Kienle is lying or Mr. Ortiz is lying, and here we are in a preliminary hearing,” Schneidewind said.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Douglas Gregg, however, said the evidence of all three defendants’ guilt was “overwhelming” and that Ortiz was the key player in the crimes.

“Mr. Ortiz was orchestrating the unlawful activity. He was the contact with Jeffries,” Gregg said. “Mr. Kienle, looking upon Mr. Ortiz as the registrar of San Diego, as a department head, took him at face value.”

Kasimatis ruled that, even if much of the money Ortiz is accused of misappropriating was used for genuine governmental purposes--such as paying for county employees to attend job-related conferences--it was wrong for the money to be diverted without the approval of top county officials.

The defendants “cannot decide how, when and why and for what purpose county funds can be spent,” Kasimatis said. “That is the misuse of the trust of the county office.”