BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KERO) — Cedric Struggs, 60, was in court regarding his petition to be released at 11 a.m. on Thursday, December 15th. Struggs has been in prison for over 40 years after being found guilty of murder under a now-defunct California law commonly known as the felony murder rule, which was once used to convict a person of murder if they committed any felony offense that results in death, regardless of if they actually killed the person or not.
Struggs had participated in a gas station robbery that resulted in the death of a man and the injury of another when he was 18, however, Struggs was not the shooter, nor did he have a weapon. Under California Senate Bill 1437, which amends the felony murder rule, Struggs may be released. A judge will decide if his petition to be released will be granted.
The decision, however, is more complicated than it seems. Due to the case's old age, the majority of files cannot be found by the court, prosecution, and defense. The court only has access to incomplete transcripts, such as the preliminary transcript and the jury transcript, along with the transcripts of two tapes that no longer are available and cannot be verified.
Struggs' attorney, Cynda L. Bunton, argued that the lack of confirmable evidence is wrong and objected to the use of the preliminary and tape transcripts in the judge's decision.
"I think it's improper to use the prelim transcripts as evidence," said Bunton in court.
The objection, however, was overruled. According to the prosecutor, Michael Caves, "Evidence Code 365 doesn't prevent the court from looking at the transcript when that's all that's available."
Bunton also submitted two wrap sheets from two of the primary witnesses from the original trial into evidence, pointing out that the witnesses had claimed Struggs had no weapon, which the prosecution argued against. According to the transcripts, one witness says he had never said that Struggs' had no weapon.
Following this, Bunton argued that youth and potential development issues played a part in Struggs' decision to take part in the robbery, claiming that Struggs had "developmental delay issues" according to doctors and that Struggs did not have the ability to lead a robbery.
"My client was a follower, not a leader, and tended to want to fit in," claimed Bunton.
Caves, however, argued that Struggs still associated with the gunman, shared the money stolen during the robbery, and came up with the alibi for both himself and the shooter.
Judge Gregory A. Pulskamp ended today by announcing that he still has evidence to review and that he will release the results when he reaches a decision.
"I will rule by way of written order," said Pulskamp.
Upon hearing this, Bunton brought up to the judge that Struggs would like to be present when the decision is made.
"My client is adamant about wanting to be present," she told Judge Pulskamp.
Pulskamp then explained to Bunton, Struggs, and the court that Struggs does not have the right to request to be there, as the case is a petition and not a trial, however, he will take the matter into consideration.
