Defense motions denied in Chapman case

AVENAL — In Monday’s episode in Charlotte Chapman’s long-running courtroom drama, a motion to dismiss her case in “the name of serving justice” was denied by visiting Superior Court Judge Barry Hammer.

Had he granted the motion, the criminal side of the case, which now runs to 800 pages and hundreds of hours in court and court preparation, could have ended there in the sparse Avenal court.

Also denied by Hammer was a motion to allow Chapman to change her original nolo contendere plea in her workers’ compensation fraud case to a plea of not guilty, a move which would have sent the case back yet another step.

Hammer, after calling the opposing sides into chambers during a recess, decided the Kings County District Attorney’s office had lacked ample time to study the latest briefs. He set the next hearing for Wednesday, May 10 , at 10 a.m. in the Avenal Superior Court.

Legal maneuvering in the case by San Mateo attorney James Robert Courshon involves a member of a leading Hanford law firm, and questionable actions by the Kings County District Attorney’s office with the involvement of Chapman’s former husband Lancy Allyn, a well-known Hanford doctor.

Monday’s hearing heard Courshon explain to Hammer that Chapman has already suffered prison time, expenses of legal representation and stress involved in the case. “If you want to see justice (done) she’s already paid the price,” Courshon told Hammer.

But Shane Burns, representing the Kings County District Attorney’s office and a member of the original prosecution team, argued that Chapman agreed to the plea but became unhappy with the results when she was given prison time rather than probation. The district attorney’s office had suggested probation.

“The fact she’s changed her mind isn’t relevant,” Burns noted Monday as he questioned Chapman’s creditability.

Chapman, crying during much of the 75-minute hearing, held hands with Courshon’s assistant, Harriet Speight, while the results hung in the balance.

The woman, a former pharmaceutical salesperson and member of Hanford’s elite, according to Courshon, was a victim of a misunderstanding of the law.

She served 19 months of a three-year sentence in prison for workers’ comp fraud, but contends there were errors in her defense and has alleged legal conflict of interest in the case.

Courshon explained Chapman has made some $55,000 against a total repayment of $94,000 restitution in the case. “That’s $55,000 in a case in which she would have been acquitted,” Courshon added during the Monday hearing.

Randy Edwards, a member of the Hanford law firm of Griswold, LaSalle, Cobb and Gin, was Chapman’s attorney in the workers’ compensation fraud case.

Judge Louis Bissig heard the case in Hanford Superior Court.

Hammer, a retired judge from San Luis Obispo County, was recruited after the entire corps of Kings County Superior Court judges recused themselves last year from the contentious case.

The woman, well known in Kings County, now lives north of the Bay Area.

(April 25, 2006)