Antelope Valley DA reports filing backlog reduction, outlines common reasons for declined cases

Micah Piantoneta, head deputy for the Antelope Valley office of the District Attorney, reported to the Lancaster Criminal Justice Commission that his office has been working through and substantially reducing a backlog of older electronic case submissions. Piantoneta said the office had about 450 backlog cases when the project began and had reduced that number to roughly 100 older submissions; the office is now focusing on recent investigations and defendants in custody.

Piantoneta presented filing and decline counts for May and June across several felony categories. Examples he provided include: auto theft filings of 24 in May and 12 in June with 12 declines in May and nine in June; burglary filings of 15 in May and six in June (one decline in May); felony assault filings of 24 in May and 16 in June with 11 declines in May and eight in June; felony DUI filings of eight in May and two in June with one decline in each month; illegal firearms filings of 14 in May and 12 in June with declines of six in May and two in June; and murder/attempted murder filings one in May and one in June with no declines in those months. Piantoneta also reported filings and declines in other categories including criminal threats, drug sales, domestic violence, grand theft/identity theft, robbery and vandalism.

On the question why some cases are declined, Piantoneta said declines can reflect insufficient evidence, missing victim cooperation and lengthy forensic waits (for example, DNA results that can take months). He noted that on sex‑crimes cases, victim unwillingness to cooperate is sometimes decisive and that the office will not proceed without victim cooperation in some categories. Regarding auto theft declines, he cited Vehicle Code section 10851 (unlawful driving or taking of a vehicle without the owner’s consent) and said prosecutions can be difficult where there is no evidence the driver knew the vehicle was stolen — for example, where a driver claims they were loaned the car.

Piantoneta told commissioners the backlog work was accomplished primarily through extra work time rather than new hires: his office requested comp time for deputy DAs to work weekends and was given comp time to use later. Commissioners asked for more detailed reasons for declines in specific categories; Piantoneta offered to speak with specialty unit prosecutors (for example, the sex‑crimes unit) and return with more granular explanations at a future meeting.

Commissioners did not take any formal action on the DA report; the presentation was a factual briefing and followed by questions.