Friday, Nov. 7, 2003 | 9:51 a.m.
Both attorneys representing Garry and Pamela Horrocks in the county's first election fraud case since 1987 argued for dismissal of the indictments against their clients Thursday because, they claimed, the explanations for each of the 62 counts of voter fraud, conspiracy and burglary were duplicitous, too complex and made little sense.
Dominic Gentile, Garry Horrocks' attorney, told District Judge Joseph Bonaventure that his client's case would go to trial, but not under the current indictment. He argued that his client has a "right to a clearer indictment" and that the current indictment would become a "nightmare in dealing with evidentiary evidence and jury instructions."
Horrocks and his wife are charged with signing and submitting fraudulent absentee ballots for at least 10 voters in the Assembly District 37 election in which Marcus Conklin, D-Las Vegas, defeated Republican Francis Allen by 134 votes.
Gentile argued that the first count, for example, does not mention any specific election violation but that it referred to four separate election laws, one that had multiple parts. The indictment also refers to multiple theories, including conspiracy. That led the district attorney's office to drop count 62, which was conspiracy to commit burglary and/or forgery and/or violation of the law of governing elections.
Chief Deputy District Attorney James Sweetin countered that the indictment was more specific in its explanations than any other pleading.
"The state has gone out of its way to lay out in common language exactly what these counts mean," Sweetin told Bonaventure.
Gentile and Pamela Horrocks' attorney, Michael Cristalli, also filed writs of habeas corpus, arguing that there was a lack of evidence to support the burglary charge against their clients. Sweetin said the charge, which carries a one to 10-year sentence compared to one to four years for the other charges, alleges that the couple entered the election office with the intent to commit a felony.
archive
