Judge to Decide on Life Without Parole for Juvenile

A Ventura County judge is scheduled to decide today whether a 17-year-old boy should be sentenced to life in prison without possibility of parole.

Several officials who monitor the sentencing of juveniles said they know of no California case in which a minor has been sentenced to a no-parole life term. Until 1990, when voters approved Proposition 115, juveniles could not be sentenced to life without parole in California.

The youth, Vincent Medrano of Ventura, was one of four teen-agers convicted of first-degree murder in the drive-by slayings of two Saticoy men on April 7. He also was convicted of a special-circumstance allegation that more than one person was killed in the crime.

Under Proposition 115, juveniles convicted of a special circumstance can be sentenced to life without possibility of parole. And on Tuesday, Ventura County Deputy Dist. Atty. Saundra T. Brewer said she will ask Superior Court Judge Frederick A. Jones to impose the maximum sentence.

“I believe, and my office’s position is, that we should seek the most severe penalty,” Brewer said. “This would not have happened if not for Vincent Medrano.”

But Medrano’s attorney, James Matthew Farley, said his client has expressed remorse for the slayings and has been a model prisoner since his arrest nearly a year ago. Farley said he hopes that Jones will choose one of the less severe options permitted under the law.

“I’ve got a kid that’s trying,” Farley said, saying that Medrano has obtained a high school diploma while in custody. “Since he’s been at Juvenile Hall and away from the gang atmosphere, everybody tells me he’s been a hell of a nice kid.”

Medrano did not fire the shots that killed Rolando Martinez, 22, and Javier Ramirez, 18, and wounded two other men as they stood outside a baptism party.

But according to trial testimony, Medrano and another teen-ager, Carlos Vargas, purchased the .22-caliber rifle earlier that same day. And shortly before the shooting, as he and several other youths were drinking in a Ventura lemon grove, Medrano brought up a grudge he had against a gang based in Saticoy, according to witnesses at his trial.

With Vargas at the wheel and Medrano in the back seat, four of the youths drove to Saticoy. There, another back-seat passenger--Edward (Tony) Throop, now 18--fired several shots, according to testimony at Throop’s trial. Neither of the slain men were gang members, investigators said.

After two days’ deliberation, a jury on Sept. 25 decided that Medrano aided and abetted Throop and was guilty of two counts of first-degree murder, two counts of attempted murder and the special circumstance. Throop was convicted of the same charges at an earlier trial and also faces a possible life-without-parole term when he is sentenced on March 20.

Mark Solar, executive director of the San Francisco-based Youth Law Center, which monitors juvenile sentencing, said he knows of no case where a minor has received a life-without-parole term in California.

David P. Compton, a Los Angeles County deputy district attorney who is juvenile justice chairman for the California District Attorneys Assn., said he also knows of no such case. He said there has barely been enough time for such a case to get through the legal system since passage of the initiative.

If Medrano receives a no-parole prison term, Farley said it will be appealed on the grounds that Proposition 114, also approved in 1990, does not provide for no-parole terms for juveniles. Defense attorneys say Proposition 114 takes precedence over Proposition 115 because it received more votes.

Farley has made that same argument in a motion that Jones is expected to rule on today before sentencing Medrano.

If Jones decides against a no-parole sentence for the slayings, he has two other basic options:

* A 25-years-to-life sentence, with commitment to the California Youth Authority. Under that sentence, Medrano would be released in about eight years because the CYA cannot hold inmates after their 25th birthday, regardless of their sentence.

* A sentence of 25 years to life, with commitment to the Department of Corrections. That would mean Medrano would have to serve at least 18 years in prison but would eventually be eligible for parole. Under this option, Medrano could be housed at the California Youth Authority until he reaches age 25 and then transferred to a state prison.

Since his arrest, Medrano has been housed at Juvenile Hall with Vargas, even though Vargas, Medrano’s lifelong friend, pleaded guilty and testified against Medrano at his trial.

In exchange for Vargas’ testimony, prosecutors agreed to seek a maximum term of 25 years to life in his case, with the possibility that he will eventually be paroled. His sentencing will be scheduled at a hearing on March 20.

Joseph Scholle, the fourth occupant of the drive-by vehicle, was also convicted of murder, but since he was only 15 at the time, the maximum penalty that he could receive was commitment to the Youth Authority until he turns 25.