Attorney Concedes He Would Handle Case Differently Today

An attorney whose defense in a drive-by shooting case has been questioned by the state Supreme Court testified Wednesday that he would handle the case differently today.

Wayne Redmond, who practices from an office in Woodland Hills, made the admission in an unusual hearing ordered by the Supreme Court, which sent the case against Redmond’s client Danny Zizumbo, back to Ventura County for further review.

If Superior Court Judge Brian Back rules that defense errors cost Zizumbo a fair trial, he could either go free or be tried again. He currently is serving a prison term of at least 38 years in the 1996 shooting.

Wearing leg chains, Zizumbo looked on as his former attorney acknowledged under questioning that he should have presented evidence from a 911 tape that raised doubt about his client’s role in the shooting.

On the tape, an eyewitness named another man as the shooter. In court, Redmond told Zizumbo’s current attorney, Leonard Chaitin, that he did not introduce it as evidence because his investigator could not locate the witness for an interview.

But Chaitin pressed him on why he decided not to introduce a tape that might have aided his client.

“As I sit here today, I can’t answer that,” Redmond said. Redmond also acknowledged that it might have been helpful to fight admission of a lengthy statement his client made to Ventura police officers before they advised him of his rights.

“If I was trying the case now, I’d probably do it just to be on the safe side,” he said. “At that time, I did not consider it so.”

After the trial, two higher courts ruled that Zizumbo’s statement was inadmissible because police did not read him the Miranda warning before they interrogated him.

The complex case began Jan. 8, 1996, when shots were fired into a group of teens from a white van cruising through Saticoy. Daniel Rodriguez, then 16, suffered chest and leg injuries. At the time, both he and a friend said the gunman was 16-year-old Victor Ocegueda, who was in the van along with Zizumbo, then 21, and another youth, Eric Martinez, 19.

However, both later backed away from that assertion.

Ocegueda--the youth identified on the 911 tape--later fingered Zizumbo.

Police took Zizumbo in for questioning. After a 2 1/2-hour interview, they arrested him. Only then did they read him his rights, according to Ventura Police Det. Sean Conroy, who also testified Wednesday.

Conroy said Zizumbo was cooperative and had voluntarily accompanied them from his home to the police station. Conroy said he did not think that Zizumbo was technically in custody during his interview. Consequently, he did not require the Miranda warning, which advises suspects of their rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present during questioning.

However, Conroy also acknowledged on the stand that Zizumbo would not have been allowed to leave after admitting he had been in the van linked to the shooting. That admission occurred about 20 minutes after Zizumbo started talking.

During a break in Wednesday’s hearing, a few of Zizumbo’s friends and family were critical of the process that led to his conviction.

“It makes me cry,” said family friend Connie Santoy, who was in the courtroom translating for Zizumbo’s mother. “I feel he was just herded to the slaughter.”