Posts Tagged ‘dog bite’

Whittier Man Pleads in Pit Bull Attack on Man

Sunday, November 27th, 2011

NORWALK — A Whittier father who unleashed the family pit bull on a man during a fight pleaded no contest today and was sentenced to three years in state prison, the District Attorney’s office announced.

Richard Rudy Aragon, 52, pleaded no contest to one count of assault with a deadly weapon likely to produce great bodily injury and admitted the great bodily injury allegation before Judge Margaret Bernal, said Deputy District Attorney Michael Derose. He was immediately sentenced to prison, and will serve his time in prison under the new state law.

In exchange for his plea, two additional felony counts, including mayhem and another count of assault with a deadly weapon, were dismissed.

Aragon and his 17-year-old son were charged in the June 25th attack after the son allegedly confronted a 43-year-old man and demanded his wallet. The man refused and the pair began fighting in front of Crestwood Apartments in the 8900 block of Painter Avenue, near Lambert Road, Whittier Police Department said.

Aragon came to the boy’s assistance and released the pit bull, who bit both ear tips off the victim. The suspects also allegedly punched and kicked the victim while the dog attacked, police said.

Prosecutors are seeking to have the son, whose name is not being released because of his age, tried as an adult on two counts of assault with a deadly weapon, a foot, with force likely to inflict great bodily injury, one count of attempted robbery and one count of witness intimidation.

Should dogsitter be criminally liable for dog’s attack?

Friday, May 22nd, 2009

Recently, in a California case, the defendant’s dog bit the victim’s leg.  The jury convicted the defendant of assault by means of force likely to cause great bodily injury and the personal infliction of great bodily injury.

The California court held that the evidence supported the finding that the evidence supported the finding that one of the dogs obeyed the defendant’s command to attack and maul the victim.  The defendant knew that the dogs would attack on command, having been present during an earlier incident when the dog’s owner had instructed the dogs to attack a man. The dog’s also obeyed the defendant who cared for them.

When a neighbor told the defendant to stop the attack, the defendant refused to call off the dogs.  The California court held that the defendant directed the attacked and hindered its ending so that the defendant, not the dog, should and could be held responsible for personally inflicting great bodily injury.  People v. Frazier (2009)  173 Cal.App.4th 613.