The following is a press release issued by the Mendocino County District Attorney’s Office:
A Mendocino County jury returned from its twenty-minute deliberations a little before noon on Wednesday morning to announce it had found the trial defendant guilty as charged.
Defendant Matthew David Foster, age 51, of Willits, was found guilty of having committed perjury, a felony, in his efforts to unlawfully transfer title to a car that did not belong to him.
The defendant was also found guilty of submitting a forged document in his effort to unlawfully seize title to the subject vehicle, a felony.
After the jury was excused, a bifurcated evidentiary hearing was calendared for December 15th for the prosecutor to present evidence showing that the defendant has suffered a prior “Strike” conviction.
If the Strike allegation is found true on the 15th, the voter-modified “Three Strikes” law mandates that the defendant receive an enhanced state prison sentence.
The investigating law enforcement agency was the California Highway Patrol.
The prosecutor who presented the People’s evidence to the jury was Deputy District Attorney Jamie Pearl.
Mendocino County Superior Court Judge Keith Faulder presided over the three-day trial.
Such bullshit. This guy is getting screwed over.
Yes the defendant most certainly is…
I know this man. He is getting railroaded. This same man saved my life last year.
This is not true! The plaintiff lied on the stand. And had given the title and the car to Matt in exchange of labor. The plaintiff back ground was dismissed but Matt’s was used against him. How can a lier get away with such accusations.
I’m reading all these comments that the man is innocent, why didn’t any of you testify on his behalf??
This man did not steal the plaintiffs car or title of. It was given in exchange for labor. The plaintiff lied on the stand. His past was dismissed and Matt was used against him. This was a predgest action.
Why didn’t any of you testify on behalf of the mans innocence??
Wow! They’re going to strike him out for this?
So, four people here are saying the man was innocent of the crime! Why didn’t any of you testify on his behalf?
Because the Judge in this case stricken the entire defenses ability to properly show cause for the litigating circumstances.
My Brother had a right to know the man’s past criminal past before working for him. Right..
I mean that’s why business’s are allowed to run background checks of potential workers.
To protect from being associated or, from falling victim to such felons. My Brother trusted the man’s honesty. This was the ladies husband for crying out loud. Why wouldn’t he trust him to what he told him to do with the pick slip of the automobile he gave him. Funny, there wasn’t a charge for burglary. If he didn’t give it to him, how did my Brother. Furthermore, why would a guilty man take it to have it registered and insured, smoged. Who does that..
This whole thing needs to be recognized. This is our own county court system. Which has been doing g this for far to long