Church Pastor Convicted of Child Rape Seeks New Trial

By Gary V. Murray
Telegram & Gazette
September 2, 2012

http://www.telegram.com/article/20120902/NEWS/109029868/1116/raw_headlines

WORCESTER — Claiming ineffective assistance of counsel, a former church pastor convicted of having sex with a 14-year-old girl is asking that he be granted a new trial.

The Rev. Angel Morales, 34, onetime pastor of the Casa de Restauracion church at 134 Spruce St. in Leominster, was sentenced to 10 to 12 years in state prison last year after being found guilty in Worcester Superior Court of two counts of child rape aggravated by age difference.

The jury acquitted Rev. Morales on a third count.

The victim, whose family attended Rev. Morales' church, testified at his February 2011 trial that she and her pastor engaged in sexual intercourse three times in late 2009 and early 2010 when she was 14 years old.

Judge Richard T. Tucker has scheduled an evidentiary hearing Oct. 19 on Rev. Morales' motion for a new trial, which he filed in February. His appellate lawyer, David M. Jellinek, alleges that Rev. Morales' trial lawyer, Leonard J. Staples, was ineffective. The request for a new trial faults Mr. Staples for failing to file a pretrial motion to suppress a videotaped confession Rev. Morales gave to police and a Miranda rights waiver form he signed.

Mr. Staples did object to the introduction of the statement and waiver form at trial.

The police interview of Rev. Morales was conducted in English, and the waiver form was written in English, even though the Spanish-speaking suspect was not fluent in English and needed the assistance of a friend to act as an interpreter during the interrogation, according to the motion.

The waiver form required Rev. Morales to provide his date of birth, which Mr. Jellinek said constituted an admission to an element of the crimes with which he was ultimately charged.

Child rape aggravated by age difference carries a mandatory minimum 10-year prison sentence when the victim is between the ages of 12 and 16 and there is more than a 10-year age difference between the offender and victim.

"Looking at the totality of the circumstances, it is clear that the defendant did not fully understand his rights, or that he was waiving them because, even though there was ample opportunity, he was not read his Miranda rights in Spanish, was not given a Spanish-language Miranda waiver form, and the police did not even ask his 'friend' who was serving as an interpreter to provide to the defendant his rights in Spanish," Mr. Jellinek said in his motion.

In his written opposition to the motion, Assistant District Attorney Stephen J. Carley said it was "fatally deficient" in two respects. First, he said, Rev. Morales failed to establish that Mr. Staples' acts or omissions deprived Rev. Morales of an otherwise available ground of defense "because his attorney in fact challenged the admissibility of his statements to police, moved to exclude the defendant's statements regarding his date of birth, and argued forcefully to the jury that they should not consider the defendant's statements because they were unintelligent and involuntary."

Mr. Carley further argued that Rev. Morales was not prejudiced by Mr. Staples' failure to file a motion to suppress before trial because such a motion would not have been allowed.

"Where a motion to suppress would not have been successful, there is no merit to the defendant's claim of ineffective assistance and accordingly no basis to grant the defendant the extraordinary relief of a new trial," he wrote.

Mr. Staples could not be reached for comment.

Judge Tucker instructed the jurors before the recorded interview with Rev. Morales was played for them at trial that they could consider the statements as evidence only if they were convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Rev. Morales made them, that he did so of his own free will and that he voluntarily waived his right to remain silent and to have a lawyer present before agreeing to speak with investigators.

Contact: gmurray@telegram.com