If a tree falls in the forest, and no one hears it does it still make a sound? Perhaps a better question is if a man is convicted of charges related to trying to burn down his own restaurant, but the courtroom doesn’t have room for his family to watch the proceedings, is he still guilty? In California, not so much.
Sundeep Dhami was serving a 15-year prison sentence for conspiring to burn down his Sacramento restaurant when his conviction was thrown out after his lawyer argued that he had been denied his right to a public trial.
Dharni, 42, was released last month because some spectators, including members of his family, were excluded from the courtroom during part of jury selection to make room for a large pool of prospective jurors.
Don’t think crime pays, though, as he did serve about half his sentence. He also had to accept a plea deal and a new sentence equal to time already served.
His lawyer, Quin Denvir, argued in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that Dharni was denied his Sixth Amendment right to a public trial, an argument that had already been rejected once when made by an earlier attorney on the case.
Dharni was found guilty in July 2007 of trying to burn down the restaurant he was about to open, and for collecting $22,291 from
Farmers Insurance on a related claim.
Denvir was named to represent him in 2012.
In 2014, a 3-judge circuit panel asked a lower court to decide "whether spectators had an opportunity to re-enter the courtroom during (jury selection)" while selection was underway.
All agreed it would be impossible to come up with precise answers to the circuit's questions about 7-year-old events. In January, Denvir and the prosecutor asked the circuit to let them find out whether the court in Sacramento would grant a motion by the government to dismiss Dharni's convictions, conditioned upon Dharni's acceptance of a plea agreement and a re-sentence to time served.
The circuit granted the request.
