Mendocino County District Attorney David Eyster’s attempt to challenge the controversial ruling of Judge Clayton Brennan in the well-known Thunder the Wonder Dog trial has been struck down at the Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District in San Francisco.
The case of Thunder the Wonder dog gained national attention in December 2019 when the German Shepard was found near death in the woods near Caspar. Investigators determined the owner Katie Rhiannon Smith had neglected, botched the execution of the dog at gunpoint, and eventually abandoned Thunder in the woods of coastal Mendocino County.
Many were inflamed when Smith would go on to plea no contest to felony animal cruelty during the October 2020 hearing which resulted in a sentence of unsupervised probation for a term of 36 months, no jail time, the requirement to attend counseling, which prohibited her from possessing animals during that probation period, and required her to serve 500 hours of community service.
District Attorney Eyster was incensed at this outcome, saying in a press release, “It is tough to find justice for victims and the community when there are two defense attorneys in the courtroom – one sitting at counsel table and one wearing a black robe.”
This resulted in a legally unique circumstance in which District Attorney Eyster barred Judge Brennan from hearing any pending criminal case or future cases in which a defendant is charged with animal cruelty or the use of firearms.
As per a press release issued last night, District Attorney Eyster’s attempts to challenge the Judge Brennan’s ruling, which he called “the legal equivalent of an appellate Hail Mary,” were struck down by an appeals court in San Francisco.
The press release attributes the court’s denial to their “very conservative attitude toward lower court decisions that presumes the result in the lower court is correct.”
The press release characterized “two bright lights” of news have emerged regarding the case, one of which is another Mendocino County judge in Ukiah ordered Smith to pay $4,000 in restitution for her involvement in the case, a stipulation not required by Judge Brennan.
The second “bright light,” as described by the press release, is Judge Brennan is still barred from ruling on any cases that touch on issues related to animal abuse and gun use.
Ukiah, Friday, Jan. 28. -- Wonder Dog Appeal Of Judicial Bad Judgment Denied; Protective Safeguards Won't Change.
In an unpublished opinion issued Friday, January 28th, the Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District in San Francisco denied the People’s appeal challenging the judicial bad judgment of Mendocino County’s coastal judge, Clayton Brennan.
The People’s appeal of the judgment entered by Judge Brennan in the Thunder the Wonder Dog case (aka People v. Katie Rhiannon Smith) was previously acknowledged by the DA to be the legal equivalent of an appellate Hail Mary.
This characterization is because the appellate courts have a very conservative attitude toward lower court decisions that presumes the result in the lower court is correct, requiring a party seeking relief from a lower court result to attempt to overcome this oftentimes insurmountable presumption.
As noted by the California Supreme Court in Denham v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557: “[I]t is settled that: ‘A judgment or order of the lower court is presumed correct. All intendments and presumptions are indulged to support it on matters as to which the record is silent, and error must be affirmatively shown. This is not only a general principle of appellate practice but an ingredient of the constitutional doctrine of reversible error.’”
Despite the unsuccessful appellate outcome, there remains several bright lights to be considered as this sad story winds down to its legal end.
To mention just two, the first bright light, as reported back in November of last year, is that Judge Brennan’s refusal to order defendant Smith to pay restitution was remedied (while the appeal was pending) by a different judge in Ukiah when Smith was ordered to pay over $4,000 in Thunder restitution.
The second bright light, as reported in January of last year, is that DA Eyster put in place office policies and judicial safeguards that prevent Judge Brennan from hearing any future animal abuse case. These safeguards also prevent him from hearing any case involving the use of a firearm.
When asked for comment on today’s decision, the DA said, “While my attorneys and I respect the decision of the Court of Appeal, that decision will not affect the safeguards that I put in place last year. Those safeguards will remain in place as a long as I have any say in the matter.”
The DA concluded by saying, “The true silver lining is that Thunder physically and mentally recovered ... thanks to the efforts of a lot of caring people, that he remains in a good home, that efforts to demonize him in an attempt to justify his abuse have been shown to be untrue, and that he’s helped remind all of us that we need to stay vigilant and report those who we see abusing animals.”
(DA Presser)
Geniella At Large
(Rough notes and causal thoughts)
by Mike Geniella
So, DA Dave once again has flipped his “bright lights” on a high-profile animal abuse case on the Mendocino Coast.
Even though DA Dave acknowledged late Friday that he lost his bid in a state Court of Appeals to overturn a judge’s ruling in the case [see below], he is brashly claiming victory in his “Hail Mary” legal challenge. DA Dave had hoped to embarrass Superior Court Judge Clayton Brennan further publicly, even though the associated costs of the DA’s appeal outweighed its chances.
No doubt the DA is righteous in his beliefs about the 2019 case of “Thunder the Wonder Dog.” He has pursued it with as much vigor as any criminal prosecution.
DA Dave is cruising toward a fourth term in office unopposed (the filing deadline is early March), which will make him only one of two DAs in county history to have served as long. Eyster sees this as widespread public endorsement of his prosecution policies, and management of the county’s top law enforcement office. Indeed, the DA’s office is one of the few stable operations in a county facing administrative turmoil, and sharp divisions in leadership.
Yet it is no surprise to long-time observers that DA Dave sometimes gets in the way of his own self. The dog case is an example.
DA Dave believed Judge Brennan mishandled the sentencing and was too lenient on the defendant, who had shot the dog and left it to die in the woods. The dog miraculously survived and returned to health under new care. The defendant in 2020 entered a plea of no contest to felony animal cruelty and was sentenced to unsupervised probation for 36 months, a counseling requirement, and a ban on owning animals during her probation. She also was required to serve 500 hours of community service.
DA Dave knows how to seize on public sentiment about animal abuse and turn it into political force.
The truth, however, is DA Dave’s fight with Brennan is not about Thunder the Dog.
It is really about Brennan’s audacious challenge a decade ago of the DA Dave’s “marijuana restitution” program. The judge then dared to publicly challenge DA Dave by suggesting the program was tantamount to extorting defendants unless they agreed to pay hefty fines for illegally cultivating marijuana in exchange for lesser criminal charges.
DA Dave’s program was unique in the state. It cleared up a court backlog of marijuana cases, and eventually raised $7.5 million for county coffers before voter legalization of marijuana made the program moot.
DA Dave was livid after Brennan’s denouncement from the bench of his pot program. He forced the Superior Court to keep Brennan in exile on the coast court by refusing to let him try cases at the courthouse in Ukiah. Other judges went along with Brennan’s exile to avoid a public bloodletting.
It is important to remember that DA Dave, even if unopposed in his bid to be re-elected, needs checks and balances. In an era when the news media has collapsed, and there are no longer “court reporters” roaming the halls of the courthouse and monitoring the legal process, DA Dave has free rein.
As it is DA Dave has taken to writing his own press releases and massaging his message in his own style.
Case in point is the official press release on the state Court of Appeal’s dismissal of DA’s challenge of Brennan’s sentencing in the Thunder Dog case.
DA Dave has the audacity to pretend he was interviewed in a press release he wrote himself.
“When asked for comment on today’s decision, the DA said, ‘While my attorneys and I respect the decision of the Court of Appeal, that decision will not affect the safeguards that I put in place last year. Those safeguards will remain in place as a long as I have any say in the matter’.”
Perhaps the bright lights need to be kept on DA Dave as he struts unopposed into a fourth term.
ED NOTE: Eyster subsequently busted Ms. Smith for violating the terms of her sentence by keeping chickens (!) Our information has it that Ms. Smith was not the guilty party in the shooting of the dog, that she was covering for her ex-con boyfriend of whom she lived in fear and who would go back to prison if he'd done it. People who know her say she is an animal person who would never mistreat a pet. Judge Brennan was familiar with Ms. Smith's domestic situation and did the humane thing.
Be First to Comment