Teen gets second chance at Juvenile Court

Ruling that Petaluma police "inadvertently" failed to disclose pertinent evidence in a murder case, a Sonoma County Superior Court judge Wednesday sent a teenage defendant back to Juvenile Court so the original judge can review his decision to have the case tried in adult court.

Gibb Theopolis Olivarez, who turns 18 in two weeks, is charged with murder in the Dec. 17, 2006, stabbing of Nathaniel Reifers, 31, and assault in the stabbing of Salvatore Cucci Jr., 25, behind a row of bars and restaurants in downtown Petaluma.

Although he was 16 at the time, Juvenile Court Judge Mark Tansil ruled in June last year that Olivarez should be tried as an adult because of the seriousness of the allegations.

But his defense team argued that the testimony of one witness -- which police didn't disclose until four months after the juvenile hearing -- may have changed Tansil's mind about sending the case to adult court.

His attorney, Richard Ingram, said the witness' statements support the defense theory that Olivarez wasn't the aggressor and may have been defending himself in the two stabbing incidents. Prosecutors say the testimony backs up their theory of murder.

The stakes are enormous for Olivarez. If convicted in Juvenile Court, he could not be held beyond his 25th birthday; in adult court, he could be sent to prison for the rest of his life.

In court Wednesday, following more than a year of legal briefing and hearings, Judge Ken Gnoss ruled that Olivarez's due process rights were violated by Petaluma police Detective Mike Pierre's delay in disclosing the statements of the witness to the defense.

He said he didn't believe Pierre or prosecutors intentionally suppressed evidence, as the defense argued, but that "there was an inadvertent delay" until late October, when the defense team specifically asked about the witness, Mike Leete, a bar patron.

A timely disclosure, the judge said, could have allowed Olivarez's defense team to explore the issues while the case was still under Tansil's jurisdiction.

"This court believes Mr. Leete's testimony may be relevant," Gnoss said.

After Wednesday's hearing, several of Olivarez's family members hugged and cried tears of relief in the hallway.

Pierre, the only witness called by prosecutors, testified in June 2007 that Olivarez stabbed Cucci after he refused to buy alcohol for the minor. He said Cucci at first accepted money from Olivarez but then returned it before a fight ensued and Olivarez stabbed Cucci in the thigh.

A crowd of between five and 15 adults then chased Olivarez down the waterfront, and in a second confrontation, Reifers was stabbed five times, once in the heart, other witnesses told police. Olivarez was also stabbed four times and beaten by the crowd. No knives were recovered, and no one has been arrested in Olivarez's assault.

Conflicting witness statements to police have added to confusion over how Reifers and Olivarez both were stabbed. According to court documents and attorneys, many of the victims' friends refused to speak with police initially and at least three were granted immunity before they agreed to be questioned. Several have since given statements.

Tansil ruled that the defense met four of the five criteria it must prove to keep the case in Juvenile Court. But he ruled that the circumstances and gravity of the alleged offenses were so serious the case should be sent to adult court.

But had Tansil had Leete's testimony to consider, Gnoss ruled, he may have decided differently. Leete has been described as a neutral witness who didn't know Olivarez or Reifers and only knew Cucci from the bar.

Pierre interviewed Leete on July 5, 2007, a few days after the juvenile hearing concluded, but didn't log the interview into evidence until late October.

Prosecutor Chuck Arden also wasn't aware of the Leete interview, according to court records.

Gnoss ordered Olivarez to return to court Wednesday to set a hearing date in Juvenile Court.