LAKEPORT — A judge Wednesday granted a defense change of venue motion in the case against former Lake County Sheriff”s Office (LCSO) deputy Derik Dion Navarro, but it is currently unclear where the proceedings will be moved.
Navarro, 40, faces 16 felony counts for alleged sexual acts involving a minor, reportedly a female babysitter, from more than five years ago.
Navarro has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
The case has faced many delays since originating in April 2007, most of which stemmed from attorney changes on both sides.
A trial was set to begin in early December before Navarro agreed to a plea bargain on the morning of jury selection.
The agreement called for the former deputy to plead guilty to one count of unlawful intercourse with a person younger than 16 in exchange for as many as four months in jail, probation and no sex-offender registration.
However, Judge Andrew S. Blum rejected the agreed upon sentence in January. Navarro withdrew his guilty plea as a result of the judge”s decision. Defense counsel Mitchell Hauptman subsequently pursued a motion for a change of venue.
Retired Judge Robert L. Crone Jr. presided over the venue change hearing Wednesday morning at the Lake County Courthouse.
David Druliner, of the California Attorney General”s Office, represented the prosecution.
Hauptman presented the motion for a change of venue, which was not opposed by Druliner.
Hauptman called one witness during the hearing, William Rountree.
Rountree is a graduate of the University of Wisconsin Law School and obtained a doctorate in sociology from the University of California, Berkeley. Rountree said he has worked as a researcher and consultant on jury bias for the last 12 years.
He said he was approached to conduct a study of Lake County jury eligible residents on bias against Navarro.
Rountree said the first step was to review publicity of the case in the news media. He said a total of 27 articles were written about the case, dating back to April 18, 2007. Before the plea agreement was reached on Dec. 7, a total of 10 articles were written, he said.
Since then, publicity of the case has increased in the three sources, which he identified as the Record-Bee, Lake County News and the Santa Rosa Press Democrat.
Rountree said another part of the prescreening analysis was to review public comments posted below the online news articles on the Navarro case. He said public interest grew substantially following the announcement of the plea agreement in December.
Rountree said the publicity of the case merited further study into the change of venue, so market research firm Pacific Market Research (PMR) was brought in to conduct the resident survey.
Rountree said PMR made more than 6,000 phone calls to residents to reach a final sample size of 274. Of the sample of 274 residents, 48 percent were male and 52 percent were female, which Rountree said was within the realm of accepted survey practices.
Approximately 58 percent of those surveyed had some level of recognition of the case, Rountree said. Slightly more than 50 percent of those with recognition of the case believed Navarro was “probably” or “definitely” guilty, he said.
Of those surveyed who were aware of the plea agreement, approximately 80 percent believed Navarro was guilty, Rountree said.
He said other factors, such as Sheriff Frank Rivero”s public denouncement of the plea agreement also played a role in prejudgment of the case.
Rountree said many factors that would warrant a change of venue were met, including the nature and extent of publicity surrounding the case, the nature and gravity of the alleged crimes, the status of both the defendant and alleged victim, the size and nature of the community and political considerations.
Rountree was briefly cross-examined by Druliner before stepping down. Druliner did not present any evidence or call any witnesses to testify.
Hauptman and Druliner presented brief closing statements.
Hauptman said all the extents for a change of venue had been met. Druliner said the people were satisfied that denying the change of venue motion and entering jury selection in Lake County would be inadequate given the circumstances.
Crone said a change of venue is warranted when it appears a fair trial cannot occur within the county where the alleged crime occurred. He said the testimony and survey presented by Rountree, which was unchallenged, was persuasive and well-organized.
Crone ruled that there is a reasonable likelihood that a fair and impartial trial for Navarro could not be had in Lake County and granted the venue change request.
Hauptman said he was “delighted” with the decision but was “disappointed” that the case had to be moved. Druliner declined to comment on the ruling.
A hearing is set for April 25 at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom A at the Lake County Courthouse for further discussion of matters.
Kevin N. Hume can be reached at kevin.n.hume@gmail.com or call directly 263-5636 ext. 14. Follow on Twitter: @KevinNHume.
