Riverside County prosecutors have filed more than 80 additional counts against a mother and son accused in a $142 million mortgage and investment fraud case.
Hendrix Moreno Montecastro, a 39-year-old Murrieta resident, and his mother, Helen Moreno Pedrino, 60, were arrested in November 2009 and accused of persuading mom-and-pop investors in California and Arizona to turn over savings and retirement funds as well as max out credit cards and refinance their homes by promising them big returns on investments in things like real estate, foreign currency and diamonds.
The investors lost most of their money and more than 200 Riverside County homes were pushed into foreclosure, according to allegations.
At their arraignments Monday, the two refused to enter pleas and trial was scheduled to begin June 21.
Five others charged in the case have pleaded guilty.
Montecastro, thought by prosecutors to be a second-in-command in the scheme, was originally charged with 247 felony counts, including grand theft, securities fraud, corporate identity theft and elder abuse. Riverside County Superior Court Judge Thomas Kelly found cause to send the defendant to trial on 231 of those counts following an eight-day preliminary hearing last month.
By Monday, prosecutors had added 81 counts, bringing the total to 312.
Cormac Kehoe, the deputy district attorney handling the case, said the new charges are primarily allegations of acting as an investment adviser without proper certification, and commodities fraud counts that are being offered as an alternative to existing securities fraud counts.
Pedrino, who faced 42 counts after the preliminary hearing, also was charged with additional counts.
Montecastro and Pedrino are representing themselves in the case after parting ways with several attorneys, including one who challenged Montecastro’s mental competency despite his client’s objection.
Both defendants refused to enter a plea Monday, saying the court lacked jurisdiction. Riverside County Superior Court Judge Becky L. Dugan entered not guilty pleas on their behalf and strongly urged the defendants to engage lawyers.
Montecastro repeated objections lodged previously in court against the proceeding, citing his constitutional rights and conflicts between state and federal law, among other things. Dugan called his objection “word hash” and “gibberish” and suggested he was either trying to obstruct the proceedings or did not understand what he was saying and needed representation.
Dugan offered to read every count against them aloud after Montecastro said he did not understand the charges, but the defendants changed their minds after about 14 counts.
Posts
0
No comments:
Post a Comment