SANTA ANA — A state appeals court panel Monday affirmed the conviction of a mother who dropped her 7-month-old son from a Children’s Hospital of Orange County parking structure a decade ago, but sent the case back to a judge to consider whether the woman’s mental illness should weigh in favor of a probation sentence rather than life in prison.
Sonia Hermosillo of La Habra was sentenced in May 2022 to 25 years to life in prison for killing her son, Noe. But while the Fourth District Court of Appeal justices found that the jury rightly convicted Hermosillo, who had pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, they faulted Orange County Superior Court Judge Kimberly Menninger for not taking mental illness into account when considering probation as an alternative sentence.
“The grim and paradoxical reality of our system of justice is that it is sometimes unable to deliver a result which feels truly just to all involved,” Associate Justice William Bedsworth wrote in the ruling. “This case provides an especially heartbreaking illustration.”
The defendant “was by all accounts a doting mother to her two young daughters and a wonderful wife and homemaker for her husband, Noe,” Bedsworth wrote.
“When she became pregnant with a baby boy, the couple was excited, as they had been wanting a boy for some time. The baby, Noe Jr., was born late term in January 2011 and due to his over-gestation, had several physical challenges which required medical care and therapy.”
His mother “diligently” took her son to his appointments but her “behavior completely changed” when he was a few months old, Bedsworth wrote.
“She began acting very strange,” he wrote.
Hermosillo was taken to mental health professionals, but the family could not afford the treatment and her mental health deteriorated.
Hermosillo dropped her son from a parking structure at the hospital in Orange Aug. 22, 2011. Experts for the defense testified during her trial that she suffered from post-partum psychosis. Her trial was delayed so long because she was found not mentally healthy enough to assist in her defense and was hospitalized for mental illness.
The justices found nothing wrong with the conviction or the jury’s finding that the defendant did not meet the legal definition of insane at the time of the killing.
But, the justices said, Menninger should have taken into account the defendant’s mental illness when considering probation as an alternative to the life sentence.
The law allows a judge to consider probation when the defendant has no prior criminal conduct, a willingness to comply with probation, the impact imprisonment will have on the defendant and her family and whether the defendant poses a danger to others.
“All of these factors would likely have weighed in appellant’s favor had they been considered,” Bedsworth wrote.
“Appellant’s own daughter gave a victim impact statement, imploring the court to have mercy on her mother, saying she did not want to be separated from her, and implying that her mother hand `changed’ around the time of Noe Jr.’s, birth,” Bedsworth wrote. “It is particularly notable that no member of baby Noe’s family asked the court to impose a prison term. Appellant expressed her sadness and remorse about her act of infanticide, and begged to be reunited with her daughters. And there was no evidence before the court to indicate appellant could be a danger to anyone if not imprisoned. In sum, there is simply too little in the record to indicate the trial court properly weighed probation as a punishment for appellant’s crime.”
Bedsworth added it was “especially important in light of” a new law that the disposition of any criminal case “use the least restrictive means available.”
The justice added that criminal courts “are to consider alternatives to incarceration, including probation, but they retain discretion to determine appropriate sentencing based on applicable rules.”
Source: Orange County Register
Be First to Comment