How Many Cases Does Jaime Esparza Need Overturned?

us_supreme_courtYesterday, a state appellate court ruled that Daniel Villegas should get a new trial. Villegas, who has claimed he is innocent, was convicted in 1995 for the shooting death of two teens. He was prosecuted by Jaime Esparza.

Jaime Esparza has been the District Attorney since 1993. In the 2012 election, Jaime Esparza’s platform was “fiscal responsibility”. Since being elected, Jaime Esparza has personally tried four prominent murder cases; William Berkley, David Marmolejo, David Renteria and Daniel Villegas. In the 2002 Sophia Martinez case, William Berkley was found guilty and put to death on 2010 based on his own confession and a picture implicating him in the murder.

The Daniel Villegas Case

Jaime Esparza prosecuted Daniel Villegas twice on a 1993 double murder. The original trial, in 1994, was declared a mistrial based on a hung jury. In 1995, during the second trial Villegas was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. Villegas has stated that he was coerced into confessing at the age of sixteen. Yesterday a court of appeals ruled that Villegas should get a new trial. It is unclear if Jaime Esparza will opt to prosecute Daniel Villegas again however I expect that he will.

The David Renteria Case

Jaime Esparza personally prosecuted David Renteria in 2003 for the death and kidnapping of 5 year-old Alexandra Flores in 2001. In 2006, the appellate court vacated Renteria’s death sentence because Jaime Esparza’s team left the jurors’ with the impression that Renteria had not shown any remorse.

In 2008, David Renteria was again sentenced to death by a new jury, after Jaime Esparza had to retry the penalty case against Renteria in a new penalty phase trial.

In 2011, when the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals upheld the latest death sentence, Jaime Esparza told the news media that he was “glad that we’re past this”. Esparza added that the previous reversal was “on an issue that we thought we had tried according to the law”.

The David Marmolejo Case

On March 2011, a San Antonio jury convicted David Marmolejo in the murder of his mother; Gloria Marmolejo on July 25, 2009. The San Antonio jury also sentenced David Marmolejo to 54 years in prison. Marmolejo had to be tried in San Antonio because Jaime Esparza’s prosecution of Marmolejo resulted in a hung jury in October 2011 in El Paso.

Of the four cases personally tried by Jaime Esparza, three have resulted in the cases having to be retried twice because Jaime Esparza could not secure a proper conviction the first time around. In the case of Marmolejo, not only did the taxpayers’ of the community incur the additional cost to try the case again but they also had to foot the bill to have Marmolejo’s case heard in San Antonio.

So the question that begs to asked is how is Jaime Esparza being “fiscally responsible” when three out of four case he himself tries must be prosecuted twice? More importantly, how can you trust a District Attorney to fairly prosecute a case when he is rebuked three out four times?

10 thoughts on “How Many Cases Does Jaime Esparza Need Overturned?

    1. One symptom of a corrupt system is when a system validates itself through fraudulent means. Case in point; EPISD self-investigated itself and found no wrong doing. State agencies “investigated” and found no wrongdoing. To this day the US Department of Education doesn’t see a need to investigate.

  1. timely and accurate articke about whatt a lousy trial attirney esparza is. jn the renteria case the ct. if appeals reversed the death oebalty because esparza was dishonest with the jury. the ct. handed his butt back to him. in marmalejo esparza gave the girlfriend immunity and the jury beueved she was ghe real killer. in the secknd tdial esparza was second chair and they didnt put the girlfriend on. his poor judgment is a burden to the taxayer and cosgly to human life.

    1. Is this English you are speaking (typing)? Even auto-correct couldn’t make this amount of gibberish. Maybe turn it on (if off), we can barely understand you. Not a put down, just don’t post before you check.

    1. Dear Mr.Paredes, I am Paul Koumjian and just did 15 yrs in TDCJ-CID per an Esparza prosecution of my possession of 0.47 ozs. of marijuana. Not 15 days, but 15 yrs, contrary to Texas law making that conduct a class B misdemeanor. How did he do it? He is well versed in crooked politics, and has his hands on the power of the State to punish – that’s how. The actual story is more lengthy, but what more does one need to hear except the undisputed fact that I did possess one half ounce of marihuana, and just got paroled AFTER 15 YEARS 3 weeks ago. Please contact me for more information on the circumstances surrounding this miscarriage of justice, and I will be happy to tell you the truth and substantiate it with the relevant court records that will put to shame the El Paso County Texas criminal justice system and it’s being perverted by Mr. Esparza and every sitting judge close to my case in El Paso. Go to my websites for more:
      http://www.writeaprisoner.com/inmate-profiles/pr_legal.aspx?i+z-1039181

  2. Jaime Esparza and his office allows for jury trials to occur without properly and intentionally revealing or researching the cases before going through jury trials. This is to 1.) Increase the amount of training for the prosecutors; 2.) Increase the chances of passing through the prosecutions, even though there is no law that clearly describes certain actions by the defendant(s) are unlawful. 3.) To increase revenue for the judiciary and various offices.

    I was a juror for a case that involved an arrest for an individual that should have never been arrested or should have never gone through trial. This was the 3rd case for this court to face within 6 months which involved this type of proper investigation.

    The criminal gangs are in the law enforcement offices and those in high places, like the district attorney’s office and government “legal” offices.

  3. These prosecutors are not good at all there lousy attorneys,they get convictions all on lies they misdirect the jury’s but the jury should stand up and say something,I couldn’t live with my conscious, there convicting in the wrong way and the wrong people,what’s the point in upholding the law when they think there above the law

Don't hold back, you know you want to comment, go for it!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.