Kidnapping charge added to Lazcano brother’s murder case

Pullman atorney Steve Martonick filed a motion Jan. 11 to continue the trial dates set in February for Frank and Daniel Lazcano.

Frank Lazcano

The brothers are charged with first degree murder of Marcus Schur in December 2011. Trial dates are scheduled for next month.

A first degree kidnapping charge was added to Frank Lazcano’s charges in Whitman County Superior Court by county Prosecutor Denis Tracy on Jan. 11.

Daniel Lazcano

In the motion to add the kidnapping charge, the prosecutor wrote he added one count of first degree kidnapping to the first degree murder with firearm enhancement and unlawful disposal of remains. Frank is charged with causing the death of Schur with “premeditation, as well as felony murder in the course of or in furtherance of or immediate flight from a robbery in the first or second degree.”

In the kidnap motion, it states that witness statements indicate that the victim was alive when he was loaded into a car by the defendant and his brother and driven by them. The rifle that had just been used to shoot the victim was in the car as well. Those statements had been provided to the defense many months ago.

In his statement, Martonick wrote that Frank Lazcano, 23, objected to his trial date of Feb. 11 at the time it was set and had requested a trial date after Daniel’s. Daniel’s trial is set for Feb. 25.

Martonick wrote in his motion that plea negotiations have been ongoing since the time of arraignment and continued until as recently as Jan. 3. The brothers were considering plea offers from the state which required both brothers to accept the offer, but the offers were not accepted. The brothers and their counsels were also discussing the possibility of a joint trial up until this time.

Daniel Lazcano, 21, is an essential witness to the defense in Frank’s case, the statement reads. According to the state’s theory of the case, Daniel shot Schur while assisting Frank with a burglary of the residence where Schur was located.

The statement continues to read that Daniel is agreeable to swapping trial dates with Frank and has indicated to Frank and his attorney that he would be agreeable to testifying on behalf of Frank after the completion of his trial, the motion said.

As an essential witness to Frank’s case, Daniel is “unavailable” because he would face jeopardy and would be entitled to invoke his right to silence if called to testify, the statement said. The attorney’s motion cited Frank’s right to a fair trial, which means the “opportunity to present a complete defense.”

“Just as a spouse cannot be compelled to testify against her husband, a co-defendant facing jeopardy cannot be compelled to testify on behalf of the other,” the statement said. Daniel would not face jeopardy if he was tried before Frank, and Frank asserts that he can’t present a complete defense and have a fair trial without the “unfettered” testimony of his co-defendant.