Convicted child molester gets 396 years in prison
Judge rules man must serve four 99-year sentences.
ASSOCIATED PRESS

Thursday, January 26, 2006
FORT WORTH � A man convicted of abducting a girl as she walked to an Arlington elementary school and molesting her must serve nearly 400 years in prison, a judge decided Wednesday.

Jeremiah Sexton, 23, of Springtown must serve four sentences of 99 years each.

State District Judge Wayne Salvant, calling Sexton a "serial predator," ordered the sentences to be served consecutively, making the total 396 years behind bars.

A jury convicted Sexton on Tuesday on three counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child and one count of aggravated kidnapping in an assault on a 9-year-old Arlington girl.

When he was 17, Sexton was convicted and placed on two years of probation for four counts of indecent liberties with a child in Sedgwick County, Kan., court records indicate.

I'm 1 for 4. Had 3 judges refuse to stack 45x3, 20x3, and lifex2

I had a judge down in south TX, bless his heart, stack 6 2nd and 3rd degree sexual assaults and indecency cases, all on the same victim, for a total of 109 years.

Hmmm, as I look at this I wonder if the numbers are the key - maybe if the jury gives a different number of years on some of the cases, the judge is more inclined to think they meant for it to be cumulative....

Such a final sentence for such an eggregious offender. Do you think he might have rather faced the D/P? Also, wondering if anyone in Texas ever obtained a greater sentence?

In criminal Sexton's case the Judge assessed punishment. At punishment criminal Sexton's relatives testified to the crimes he performed on them when they were young. The police car video showed his arrest. In his car was his victim and a bunch of porn. The jury took twenty minutes to elect a foreman, review the charge, take a vote, mark the charge and then return the guilty verdict. Then the judge got to hear about his female relatives, his victims in Kansas, et cetera.

So stacking these sentences seems quite appropriate.

There was a period of time in the early '70's where they changed the sentencing scheme in a way that led to some astronomical numbers. See Ransonette v. State, 550 S.W.2d 36 (sentence of five thousand and five (5005) years). I doubt those guys could ever parole out even in the bad old days of 3 for 1 good time and mandatory supervision.

[This message was edited by John Rolater on 01-26-06 at .]

17 year old Defendant found guilty of 4 counts of indecency by contact and 3 counts of aggravated sexual assault. Jury sentenced defendant to 20 on each ASA and 10 on each Indcecency.

I ask the court to instruct the jury that the sentences may be run concurrent or allow me to argue the point. Judge refused my request and refused to stack the sentence. Jurors later told me they believed the sentences would be stacked.

It seems to me that the law ought include some way for a jury to just let the judge know that they'd like the sentences stacked. Wouldn't even have to be binding, just a suggestion. All three of my juries expected that the judge would stack, I think.
This is just off the top of my head, but I don't see why some well placed legislation couldn't fix that!

My judge stacks all the time on molesters. we had one with three victims: 75 + 75 + 20= 170. This is not the Tarrant Co. judge who stacked Sexton, so we have a few who will stack. The last time I moved to stack, I gave as one reason that I think the jury expects it. I took a peek and twelve heads were nodding up and down.

My judge normally stacks, but last month we got sentences of 55, 20 and 10 and he refused to stack. The jury expected them to be stacked and were a little pissed. Once, when sentencing was put off for a week or 2, I got letters from 11 of the 12 jurors stating that they expected the sentences to be stacked. Amazingly, the sentences got stacked!

I just gotta tell the whole story... Two-time-(and more...)-loser on parole for 2 cc 25 year forgery sentences given to him in 1992 didn't believe in keeping the license plate on his truck properly illuminated. Local DPS trooper falls in behind him and lights him up. Ex-con pulls over momentarily but then decides to make a run for it. He runs through a road block striking a local officer with a glancing blow (officer only received a sore back and some scrapes, thank goodness...), bails out in Hardin County and is tracked down by TDC dogs soon thereafter. He then tries to put a hit out on the DPS trooper who was chasing him. Well, he actually does hire a hit man (from jail, no less) but, unfortunately for the crook, he hired an "imported" undercover ATF agent from Mississippi. The feds were happy to help since he was offering hand grenades as payment for the hit. I first tried him on Solicitation and Conspiracy To Commit Capital Murder of the DPS trooper before a jury. The jury gave him 2 Life sentences and the trial judge stacked one of them (don't ask me why just one was stacked...) on the 25 year forgery sentences. Ex-con then asked for a speedy trial on the Att Cap Murder and Agg Asslt On A Public Servant charges (arising when he ran through the road block). Of course, I aim to please so we picked a jury on those two charges Monday. He was convicted in short order by a jury yesterday. Oh, I almost forgot, the ex-con complained about the first trial judge not being fair and threatened to file a motion to recuse. So the judge assigned one of our retired judges (who just happened to be our former District Attorney as well) to hear the cases this week. Well, the crook now has 2 MORE aggravated Life sentences and the retired judge stacked those on the first 2 Life sentences... Wow, and they actually pay me to do this job!!!! p.s. The DPS trooper testified that he probably was only going to give the crook a warning ticket for the license plate light violation... until he hooked'em up. Have y'all ever heard of that melodious tune - "I fought the law... and the law won...?"

Mike, I'm betting that without stacking, your tune would not be so cheerful.

How many afterlifes is that? Can someone beat that fantastic figure?

Not sure about beating 5005 years, but how about this? Tried a lutheran minister back in spring of 2003 for molesting 9 young men over approximately a one year time span while he was their pastor and youth minister, supposedly. The jury assessed the maximum sentence on each count and our Judge stacked the sentences for total of 397 years. On top of that, the young men sued the Lutheran Church as well, and received a verdict of $37,750,000 and they got paid.
Second, tried the local high school computer administrator for using his home and school computer to keep up his child porno site, which he sent out pictures of him molesting his niece and stacked 13 counts for 250 years.

Waco man gets life for years of sexually abusing young charge

By Tommy Witherspoon Tribune-Herald staff writer

Friday, February 10, 2006

A 60-year-old Waco man who sexually abused a young girl he agreed to help raise after her mother abandoned her was sentenced to life in prison Thursday.

A 54th State District Court jury of seven men and five women deliberated about 90 minutes before convicting Gilberto Mata Sr. of four counts of aggravated sexual assault, three counts of sexual assault and three counts of indecency with a child.

Jurors deliberated 25 minutes before recommending that Judge George Allen sentence Mata to four life sentences, six 20-year sentences and assessing him fines totaling $70,000.

Allen ordered that Mata serve all but two of the sentences concurrently, meaning that Mata won't be eligible for parole for at least 50 years.

Before the punishment phase of Mata's trial started, courtroom deputy Ken Fleischhauer reported to the court that he walked in on Mata during an apparent suicide attempt in the holding cell behind Allen's courtroom about 12:40 p.m.

Mata, standing on the toilet, had removed his tie and fashioned a noose with it. One end was tied around his neck and Mata was trying to tie the other end around the metal divider between the toilet and the cell door, Fleischhauer told the judge.

The deputy told Mata to get down and took his belt and tie from him. Mata returned to the courtroom with his hands shackled to a chain around his waist. He remains on a suicide watch, Fleischhauer said.

Mata's victim, now 20, testified during the four-day trial that she went to live with Mata and his former wife after her mother said she could not care for her. Trial testimony revealed that Mata and his former wife agreed to help raise a number of children other than their own over the years.

The young woman said Mata abused her from the time she was 6 until she became pregnant when she was 18. She didn't tell anyone of the constant abuse until after she became pregnant in April 2004 and Mata called her to insist that she tell her boyfriend, who was there at the time, that the baby belonged to Mata, not her boyfriend, according to trial testimony.

Prosecutors Beth Toben and Mark Parker introduced DNA evidence to prove that the girl's baby, who is being raised by a Mata family member, was fathered by Mata.

In punishment phase testimony, a Mata family member testified that Mata also abused her on several occasions beginning when she was 11.

Defense attorney Richard Ferguson declined comment after the trial. He argued that the girl made up the earlier sexual assault allegations because she was embarrassed after she became pregnant with Mata's baby when she was a young adult.

Toben said she was pleased with the verdicts.

"I think the jury felt like it was unforgiveable that he had taken on that role in her life of grandfather after she had been abandoned by her mother, and then to use her for his own gratification and to destroy that relationship after he had given her hope for a family," she said.

Unfortunately we only had three counts that were stackable, because most of the offenses had occurred prior to September 1, 1997. What a great job this is.

what happens if the judge initially denies the motion to stack, but then changes his mind a couple of days later and wants to stack?

If the defendant has already begun his sentence a trial court cannot stack it. See Ex parte Townsend No. 74,764 (Tex. Crim. App. 06/16/04).