Orange County supervisors approve victim impact statement ahead of federal sentencing

The Orange County Board of Supervisors voted to approve a victim impact statement to be submitted for inclusion in the federal pre-sentence report for the case identified in the agenda (a defendant named in the transcript as Andrew [name variants appear in the record]). The board approved the statement, as amended, by a 3–1–1 roll-call vote on April 29, 2025.

County Counsel summarized the board’s action and the short deadline the board faced: “The PSR must be provided to the defendant 35 days before his sentencing,” and the sentencing was scheduled for June 9, placing May 5 as the practical cutoff for inclusion, counsel said. That deadline shaped much of the board’s urgency to act that day.

The central disagreement among supervisors concerned how forcefully the county should press for maximum sentencing and whether the board should attach its earlier political resolution and related letters to the victim statement. Supervisor Wynne argued the statement should preserve a detailed account of harms and include language reflecting constituents’ anger, saying the county should “consider all the charges he could have been charged with” so the judge understands the full scope of harm. Supporters of adding more material — including Supervisor Foley and Supervisor Sarmiento — urged reinserting a list of potential federal charges referenced in earlier drafts and attaching the previously transmitted resolution to strengthen the county’s presentation to federal authorities.

Opponents warned that attaching a political resolution risked conflating the board’s political voice with the victim testimonial role. Supervisor Wagner argued that the board’s role is to present victim impacts, not to press prosecutors or judges with a political document, noting, “We are the victims” but expressing concern that additional material could weaken the victim statement’s purpose.

County Counsel said the draft before the board already asked the court to consider the maximum term allowed and would not itself substitute for the separate letter the board previously sent to federal prosecuting authorities. Counsel also explained the practical submission path: the county will transmit the victim statement to the designated liaison in the U.S. Attorney’s office, which the county expects will forward materials to U.S. Probation for inclusion in the pre-sentence report.

The board approved the motion as described by counsel. The clerk recorded the roll call as: Supervisor Foley — Yes; Supervisor Winn — Yes; Supervisor Sarmiento — Yes; Supervisor Wagner — No; Chair Chaffee — Abstain. After the vote, County Counsel reported out of closed session that the board took no reportable action during the earlier closed meeting.

The board’s action forwards a more detailed victim impact statement and instructs County Counsel to transmit it for inclusion in the federal pre-sentence process; the U.S. Probation Department ultimately determines what is included in the PSR and what is provided to the court and defendant.

What’s next: sentencing remains scheduled for June 9; the county counsel and designated federal liaisons will proceed with submission to the U.S. Attorney’s office and U.S. Probation consistent with federal rules.