Thursday, June 13, 2013




Once Margarita Ozuna had counsel, namely Carlos Masso, it became illegal for any prosecutor to speak with Margarita Ozuna. By law their only choice was to go through Carlos Masso. Technically and to be fair the prosecutor in this case is the Attorney General's office, but with a cooperating agreement with DA Saenz.

I knew I would hold this story until the day before Ozuna's actual sentencing.  I have my reasons.  At the last hearing Margarita Ozuna plead no contest.  The sentencing hearing is tomorrow, as far as I know.  If I get a chance to go out later I will check on this.  As of this moment, Judge Leal's docket sheet shows no hearings of any nature set for tomorrow.


Every defendant processed through the jail on a bond even if released the same day has their mugshot and charges posted here.  In my original story on this issue, I verified someone in the sheriff's department kept her mugshot off of the link.  I later received it from a confidential source.  WHY WAS HER MUGSHOT NOT POSTED LIKE EVERYONE ELSE'S?


Margarita Ozuna plead no contest to a lessor included office of 86.10(g)

"g) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor unless the person is convicted of an offense under Section 64.036 for providing unlawful assistance to the same voter, in which event the offense is a state jail felony."

See Indictment

The plea agreement is to count 2. As part of the plea, being removed from the indictment is the language at the end "and while assisting Ricardo ... ."

The trial transcript which lead to her indictment follows:

In part one the first voter witness is Ricardo Liceaga. If you look to the top of the document you should be able to figure out how to fast forward to page 73. The indictment is based on the testimony of Ricardo Liceaga.  The key testimony is on page 74.

She picked up his ballot and voted for him.  His testimony is clear and certain.

Under Election Code 64.036 the law is clear.

"(a) A person commits an offense if the person knowingly:
(1) provides assistance to a voter who is not eligible for assistance;
(2) while assisting a voter prepares the voter's ballot in a way other than the way the voter directs or without direction from the voter;
(3) while assisting a voter suggests by word, sign, or gesture how the voter should vote; or
(4) provides assistance to a voter who has not requested assistance or selected the person to assist the voter."

So why drop the felony charges when the witness's testimony is so certain and clear?

This case was brought by the Attorney General's office.  The question becomes who interviewed the witness to determine the strength of the case, an investigator with the AG's or an investigator with DA Saenz's office?

A women is charged with felonious conduct and on the day of her hearing the elected DA goes up to her and her fellow politiquera, shakes hand with at least Becerra, talks to them and then leaves.

In the above picture you will note Becerra worked as a politiquera for DA Saenz.

This is not how justice works.  It was a violation of the rules of professional conduct to speak with Ozuna.  It also sent a strong message to the politiquera duo - do not worry - you are protected.

A qualifying note:  DA Saenz does a morning walk in all of the courts wherein his ADA's have hearings.  It is normal for DA Saenz to have been in Judge Leal's courtroom that morning. It was not a special trip.

Before Judge Janet Leal accepts the plea bargain she needs to do a  full investigation to insure no back door influence or deals were done with DA Saenz. 

With such clear and certain testimony from the witness, how is it possible the AG now does not believe he can win the felony case?  Was the AG mislead about the current strength of the witness's testimony?

This is DA Saenz own doing - he made the choice to violate the rules of professional conduct.  He made the choice to cause the public to have no confidence in his conduct.  He made the choice to leave the public with a sense of impropriety.

Judge Janel Leal has the authority to call DA Saenz into court to explain his conduct, and insure this plea deal is on the up and up.  If DA Saenz fails to appear after being served a subpoena, he can be referred for contempt charges.

If no investigation is done, then it is fair we are back to doing business the same way Villalobos did business. 

A similar situation is playing out in Dallas.


BobbyWC said...

DOJ Reads Politiquera post

Potomac, Maryland, United StatesIP Address:Us Dept Of Justice ( [Label IP Address]Search Referral: — brownsville voice #1Visit Page:

Anonymous said...

Anyone can google Brownville voice a just browse how real you really are.

Anonymous said...

It is so ridiculous , and disgusting the things that go on in the court system in Cameron County.It has all the makings of a Mexican Novella.

BobbyWC said...

the problem with your comment is, it has nothing to do with Mexico - mafia, gangs, corruption are an institution in this country and have been long since before the Mexican immigration into the US. Exacly how did Mexico corrupt Nixon?

Chicago politics are some of the worse in the county and they have zero ties to Mexico.

Politics by nature leads to corruption because we are dependent on a corrupt judiciary to enforce the law.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

I just meant that it was a juicy story. One you would see in the soaps.I agree, politics everywhere seem to breed corruption.As far as the no mafia/gangs comment goes while maybe not in the traditional sense but they definitely have a group of kindred spirits.DA hanging out with a criminal and her friend before court and her attorney controlling what she says by simply being her attorney ,then you got ex DA ,A Judge and all that BS .

Anonymous said...

Politics by nature leads to corruption because we are dependent on a corrupt judiciary to enforce the law.


Anonymous said...

Bobby . . . . . you are a political animal . . . . shaping the opinions of the public politic . . . . the only difference between you and our state reps and state senators is that you are not profiting from your political action. . . The Lucio family has made millions from the votes of Cameron and Hidalgo County. . . . I just found out that Eddie SR. gets most of his votes from McAllen . . . no wonder we lost UTB and MED school to McAllen . . . Follow the dollars.

BobbyWC said...

I need to check on that - I will check the state records - that is an interesting observation

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

I cannot speak to the issue of McAllen v. Brownsville, but in terms of Hidalgo County v. Cameron County. Cameron county delivers far more votes.


State Senator, District 27
Eddie Lucio, Jr. DEM 46,362 votes

State Senator, District 27
Eddie Lucio, Jr. DEM 57,538 votes

I am no fan of Senator Lucio, but I have no reason to doubt the returns posted by the Texas Secretary of State.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

If not the votes then the dollars for sure!

Anonymous said...

Bill Clinton said, recently, that it is the money and noise that drives political decisions by politicians. That a vocal minority will have much more influence then a quite majority.

Anonymous said...

Cameron County delivers more votes in Senate Dist. 27 because it covers the entire county as opposed to Hidalgo County which only includes half of the county.

Anonymous said...

It doesn't really matter to an uneducated electorate.