Judge Agrees To Plea Deal In $1 Million Elderly Theft Case

A judge has upheld a plea deal for a woman and her son accused of bilking an elderly Palm Springs couple out of almost $1 million.

Mary Agnes Stewart, 65, and Joseph Stewart Cunningham, 47, each face 19 counts of theft of more than $400 from an elder, 19 counts of diversion of more than $1,000 in contract funds and 18 sentence-enhancing allegations that they caused more than $200,000 in property damage.

They are expected to enter their pleas on several reduced charges Monday.

A 72-year-old woman and her husband hired Stewart’s company, Stewart Construction, in 2006 to do work on their Palm Springs home, according to Roberts.

Instead, the contractors allegedly kept claiming more and more needed to be done. The company performed mostly demolition work — leaving the home uninhabitable, Roberts said.

By the time relatives of the victims stepped in, the couple had already paid nearly $800,000 in cash to the company, and the $1 million home had to be demolished, the prosecutor said.

According to Harrison, an initial agreement was made over an e-mail exchange in November 2009 between himself and Deputy District Attorney Brad Braaten.

In the e-mail exchange, the prosecutor and defense attorney agreed that if Cunningham paid $25,000 in up-front restitution and pleaded guilty to six felony counts, he would receive three years formal probation and pay $250,000 in total restitution.

Under a separate agreement, Stewart would plead guilty to a misdemeanor and pay whatever restitution was agreed upon, according to her attorney, Demitra Tolbert.

Cunningham agreed to take the plea deal and saved up the $25,000, but when he tried to enter the agreement last month, Roberts was assigned to the case and called off the settlement agreement, according to Harrison.

The defense attorney argued that the judge should uphold the agreement because Cunningham showed he had performed part of the plea bargain by saving up the $25,000 “at great personal expense.”

Roberts, who took over the case from Braaten, claimed in court documents that management within the D.A.’s Office “would not approve” the offer.

The prosecutor also said the deal was not valid because Cunningham had not paid the $25,000 or pleaded guilty.

Roberts also argued that the amount of restitution was “inadequate.”

“The plea would call for no jail time and inadequate victim restitution; therefore, should the court approve such a plea, it would be sanctioning injustice,” Roberts wrote.