Mara Steves Murder Trial Delayed

Adam Hall, who is charged with murder in connection with the traffic crash that killed resident Mara Steves in 2011, was scheduled to begin today but continued to October, according to the D.A.

The trial for , who is charged with murder in connection with a traffic crash that killed resident Mara Steves in 2011, was scheduled to begin  today but was continued to Oct. 19, the district attorney's office reported.

Shortly after the announcement was made Tuesday Deputy District Attorney Troy Pino said it is "not unusual for a murder case to get continued. The defense was not ready and needed more time for investigation."

This is not the first time the since Hall was arrested on May 24, 2011.

He pleaded not guilty on March 6 and had a pretrial on March 23. After months of postponments and a , a jury trial for Hall was set for today.

Hall, 27, of Placentia, was arrested in connection with the death of community activist Mara  Feb. 13 while trying to rescue a dog that had been running in traffic.

Orange County Sheriff's Department deputies arrested Hall in a phone booth at a Walgreens in Yorba Linda. He has been in jail ever since.

The good Samaritan's death made national news and earned a nod from which presented her husband, John, daughter Hannah and son Jonathan with a posthumous certificate in her name called The Compassionate Action Award.

Hall, who had two prior convictions for driving under the influence, has been charged with murder in the drug-induced crash, the Orange County District Attorney's office said. (After his second conviction, authorities warned Hall he could face a murder rap if he killed someone while driving under the influence.)

He was also charged with one felony count of driving under the influence causing bodily injury. If convicted, Hall faces a maximum 21 years to life in state prison.

On the , according to authorities, Hall had a virtual pharmacy of drugs coursing through his veins. Driving north on Moulton Parkway in a Ford sport utility vehicle, he allegedly sailed through a red light at Nueva Vista Drive and rammed a Toyota SUV passing legally through the intersection.

Since her death, , and  have been erected in her honor  planted by local firefighters in front of the neighborhood entrance at Nueva Vista and Moulton Parkway where the accident happened. 

Mara Steves is survived by her

David September 04, 2012 at 09:34 PM
Justice moves sloooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwly. This guy should be locked up so long he doesn't pick up another drink the remainder of his life. I'll show you a defense. You're an arrogant, cocky, hit and run alcoholic druggie who took the life of a wonderful lady, loved by more than you'll ever be. Loser.
Kathi September 05, 2012 at 08:59 PM
Well, at least it said he has been locked up since arrested so he's not out on the streets being a further menace.
Leonard Kinkade September 07, 2012 at 06:29 PM
Justice delayed is justice deniedFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search "Justice delayed is justice denied" is a legal maxim meaning that if legal redress is available for a party that has suffered some injury, but is not forthcoming in a timely fashion, it is effectively the same as having no redress at all. This principle is the basis for the right to a speedy trial and similar rights which are meant to expedite the legal system, because it is unfair for the injured party to have to sustain the injury with little hope for resolution. The phrase has become a rallying cry for legal reformers who view courts or governments as acting too slowly in resolving legal issues either because the existing system is too complex or overburdened, or because the issue or party in question lacks political favor. These are not my words, but a legal maxim which we are all familiar with. This really says it all. The D.A. does not have to agree to delays unless there are some extenuating circumstances that the defense can articulate. Give this guy his day in court and give his family and the community JUSTICE.
bob September 15, 2012 at 12:59 AM
vitural pharmacy of drugs, murder rap, drug induced crash...Words of a reporter beating the drum of an angry mob. Apparently okay for people here to call for the death of a man who has not, as one commenter points out, "had his day in court" but nobody is free to hold the writer's here accountable for using such weighted, unfounded words. Hold judgement folks, the comic book gumshoe local media doesn't know what either the prosecution or the defense has to say in this case -- don't get caught up in the hyperbole and gallow calls. The event was tragic, lets not rush to ruin a potentially innocent man. Not saying he is innocent, but you dont know if he's guilty from simply reading salacious words of the backpage internet bloggers. I'd encourage the writer to use words more carefully and not push this fragile, horrific situation in a more negative light than it needs to be.
Leonard Kinkade September 25, 2012 at 08:22 PM
As it is said in court civil tort cases: Res ipsa loquitur (Latin for "the thing speaks for itself") This Legal term, though only used in civil tort cases, seems to have some application here. Guilt or innocence’s is not the issue; it seems obvious this individual will be found guilty. The only question is what mitigating circumstances will his attorney bring up to lessen this individual's sentence. So, let's move forward with the trial and let this poor family close this chapter in their lives.
Leonard Kinkade September 25, 2012 at 08:23 PM
Part 2: Res ipsa loquitur (Latin for "the thing speaks for itself") In the common law of negligence, the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur (Latin for "the thing speaks for itself") states that the elements of duty of care and breach can be sometimes inferred from the very nature of an accident or other outcome, even without direct evidence of how any defendant behaved. Although modern formulations differ by jurisdiction, the common law originally stated that the accident must satisfy the following conditions: 1. A "duty" exists for a person to act "reasonably"; and 2. A "breach" of this duty occurs because a person [or agency, etc.] acted outside this duty, or "unreasonably"; and 3. There was "causation in fact"...the result would not have occurred "but for" the "breach" of this duty; 4. There was actual legally recognizable harm suffered by the plaintiff who did nothing wrong (i.e., no contributory negligence). Upon a proof of res ipsa loquitur, the plaintiff need only establish the remaining two elements of negligence—namely, that the plaintiff suffered harm, of which the incident result was the legal cause.
Rob45643 January 16, 2013 at 03:45 AM
Awesome, a legal expert by way of google and wikipedia. Somehow you've gathered every fact of the case through reading a blog and the applied CIVIL law to a criminal case. Assuming you picked up a law degree at DeVry and detective skills by way of Perry Mason? Please everyone, let the trial happen before making these asinine pre judgments.
Mike Murphy January 30, 2013 at 07:53 PM
bob, If your Mother, Sister, Grandma or Wife was killed in a car crash, you then read in the paper that the "suspect" had MORE then 11 drugs in his system including Meth/Speed would you still be so reserved and calm as you call for here? If people close to your Mom were making comments about the case would you ask them to stop?
Mike Murphy January 30, 2013 at 07:56 PM
Awesome, bob became Rob45643... Asinine.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something