Flagrant State Misconduct: The People of the State of California v. Cynthia Sommers, Essay Example

In an April 17, 2008 People’s Motion to Dismiss Penal Code § 1385 [a], The People of the State of California v. Cynthia Sommers [Case No. SCD195202 DA No. ABQ622], review of appellate decision in the remanded case to the Superior Court of San Diego, resulted in a landmark decision pertaining to court dismissal of State charges based on exception of flagrant prosecutorial misconduct. As cited, the defendant, Sommers was tried and convicted by jury of first-degree murder with special circumstances that the murder of Todd Sommers was intentional and carried out by the defendant for financial gain within the meaning of Penal Code 190.2(a)(1), and that the defendant intentionally killed her husband by the administration of poison, within the meaning of Penal Code section 190.2(a)(19) on January 30, 2007.

Approximately five years prior to the conviction, Cynthia Sommer had called 911 when her husband, Todd, was found lying on the floor of their military housing, ill. They had been at Knotts Berry Farm amusement park in Buena Park, California. The same evening he collapsed dead. All official respondent parties were of no avail upon contact: military police, paramedics and emergency physicians. The autopsy was performed determined cause of death to be natural. According to Pathologist, Dr. Stephen Robinson, of the Naval Medical Center, who had conducted over 500 autopsies in his career, gross evaluation of Todd’s corpse including “gross, microscopic and toxicological examination, including in-depth (emphasis added) examination of the heart and brain” failed to identify a definitive anatomic cause of death. Exonerating evidence to the case was founded on tissue deemed to be contaminated, yet presented as proof of guilt by the district attorney at trial. Plaintiff argument identified arsenic dosage in the toxicological report.  Acquittal of Cynthia Sommers was the result of dismissal for outrageous conduct and tampering in due process by the State, and precedent decision in  ( Rochin v. California (1952) 342 U.S. 165,168; People v. McIntire (1979) 23 Cal. 3d 742, 748, fn. 1; People v. Wesley (1990) 224 Cal. App.3d 1130, 1141-1142.) Judicial opinion in the Motion to Dismiss articulated the parameters of the decision: “When conduct on the part of authorities is so outrageous as to interfere with an accused’s right of due process of law, proceedings against the accused are thereby rendered improper [. . .]” (Boulas v. Superior Court, 188 Cal. App. 3d at p. 429.). Sommers spent 869 days incarcerated.

Works Cited

Bloom, Allan R. (2009) Attorney Statement, Points and Authorities in Support of Request for Discovery, [Case No. SCD195202 DA No. ABQ622].

People of the State of California v. Cynthia Sommers (2009). CNN Court TV Verdict Vault Archive. Retrieved from: http://www.cnn.com/justice

People of the State of California v. Cynthia Sommers, [Case No. SCD195202 DA No. ABQ622], 17 April 2008.