Trial Date Is Set in First County ‘3 Strikes’ Case : Courts: Man facing felony assault charges could receive 25 years to life in prison under law.

The first Orange County man charged under the tough-on-crime “three strikes” law was ordered to stand trial Friday after the defense unsuccessfully argued that his first two felony convictions shouldn’t count as “strikes” against him.

Municipal Judge Donald Macintyre in Westminster set a May 31 trial date for Mario Veliz Rodriguez, 30, who faces felony assault and weapons charges for allegedly shooting a man in the face with a flare gun during a barroom brawl.

Rodriguez faces a possible prison sentence of 25 years to life because the new “three strikes and you’re out” law mandates the term for third-time felons whose earlier convictions included serious or violent felonies.

The judge ordered the Garden Grove forklift repairman to stand trial at the close of a preliminary hearing in the case.

During the hearing, Macintyre rejected an argument by Rodriguez’s attorney that the “three strikes” legislation, designed to keep career felons off the streets, only applies to convictions after March 7 of this year, when the law went into effect.

Orange County Deputy Public Defender Leonard Gumlia told Macintyre that the legislation specifically states that a felony has to be declared a “strike” at the time of conviction. He said the public defender’s office intends to take its argument to a higher court.

“We’ll do it until the issue is resolved,” Gumlia said.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Arnold D. Westra, who is prosecuting Rodriguez, called the legal challenge “really a stretch.” He said the state Legislature clearly intended that felonies prosecuted before March of this year to count as “strikes.”

“I don’t want to comment on Mr. Rodriguez’s case, but I say taxpayers have seen violent felons commit crimes and be back on the streets, and at some point we’ve got to stop this,” Westra said after the hearing.

Supporters hail the “three strikes” law as a way to crack down on repeat offenders. But critics argue that it is overly broad, restricts judges’ discretion and unfairly allows juvenile convictions to count as “strikes.”

Defendants--particularly juveniles--often accepted plea bargains before the law went into effect that they never would have gone for if they knew what the implications would be, Gumlia said.

“We assured our (juvenile) clients that prior records would be sealed and never be used against them. We told them that,” Gumlia said.

The law also allows for dual convictions stemming from one arrest to count as two “strikes,” another point of contention with defense attorneys.

Rodriguez’s first two “strikes” were for assault with intent to commit murder and second-degree robbery. His first conviction occurred when he was a juvenile, but he was sentenced in adult court.

Friday, Rodriguez sat hunched in the courtroom, his wrists and ankles shackled, listening to a Garden Grove man recount the barroom fight that led to his March 20 arrest and his dubious distinction as the first Orange County felon to be slapped with a “three strikes” enhancement.

Donald Moore, 23, said Rodriguez was drunk and belligerent at Sugar’s bar that night, dancing “foolishly” with his shirt off. Rodriguez had been kicked out of the bar twice for bad behavior before he came back in with a flare gun, Moore said.

After Rodriguez pushed Moore’s friend, Moore testified that he stepped toward Rodriguez, who pointed the flare gun at his face. They struggled for the gun and it went off about eight to 10 inches from his head, Moore said. He pointed to a crescent-shaped scar on his right temple that he said was caused by the gun.

“I heard it go off. I felt impact and then I felt blood dripping down my face,” Moore testified. “I still had no knowledge that it was just a flare gun. I thought it was a .22.”

Gumlia pressed Moore and Garden Grove Police Officer Vince Purinton, who arrested Rodriguez, for details about Rodriguez’s state of drunkenness. He argued unsuccessfully that a flare gun may not qualify as a firearm and said the night’s events do not add up to felony assault with a weapon.

“He points the gun at Mr. Moore only after Moore took a step toward him. I think he’s guilty of brandishing a weapon,” Gumlia said.

Moore said outside of court that he thinks Rodriguez deserves a 25-year sentence.

“I think if I hadn’t reacted as I did, he would have shot me in the face,” he said. “From what I’ve read in the papers about his prior convictions, yes, I think he deserves it.”