The criminal arraignment was postponed Tuesday for the man accused of murdering a Santa Barbara doctor, his wife and daughter, and the case was assigned to Superior Court Judge Jean Dandona.
Pierre Haobsh, 26, has been charged with three counts of first-degree murder along with special allegations the offenses were willful, premeditated, and deliberate; committed by means of lying in wait; and committed for financial gain, according to the District Attorney’s Office.
He is also accused of using a firearm in connection with the crimes.
Haobsh is accused of killing Dr. Weidong “Henry” Han, 57; his wife, Huijie “Jennie” Yu, 29; and their 5-year-old daughter, Emily Han, in their home at 4640 Greenhill Way, between Goleta and Santa Barbara, “on or about March 23.”
Autopsies showed the three victims died of gunshot wounds to the head, according to the Coroner’s Office.
Han was a well-known Chinese herbal medicine doctor in Santa Barbara and worked with his wife.
At the last court hearing, lawyers from the District Attorney’s Office and County Counsel’s Office objected to an order from Judge James Herman allowing attorneys from the Public Defender’s Office access to Haobsh during the weekend after he was arrested.
Prosecutors Hilary Dozer and Benjamin Ladinig said Haobsh had been visited before he was charged or arraigned.
Judge Raimundo Montes De Oca, who has presided over the case so far, called the issue moot in court Tuesday, saying he will “not issue an order interfering with the attorney-client relationship that has been established.”
The death penalty is still on the table for this case, and two public defenders are representing Haobsh: Christine Voss and Mindi Boulet.
Deputy County Counsel Michelle Montez asked the judge to void Herman’s order, saying it could set precedent, but Montes De Oca said he won’t sign an advisory order to that effect.
He said the public defenders hadn’t followed an established procedure in this case, and the situation “could have been done better.”
Voss said she objected to the implication there were other options to get access late on a Friday or early on a Saturday. Immediate access may have been appropriate in this case, she said.
The arraignment hearing was continued to May 5 in Department 6.