Enrique Gonzalex TATOOS 7-YR-OLD WITH GANG SYMBOL

Big Charge Dismissed in Case of Dad Tattooing 7-Year-Old
by Amy Hatch (Subscribe to Amy Hatch's posts) Oct 2nd 2009 3:30PM

Enrique Gonzalez allegedly had his son tattooed with a gang symbol.

A California judge ruled that a Fresno man accused of giving his 7-year-old son a gang tattoo will not face charges of aggravated mayhem, which would have carried a life sentence.

Enrique Gonzalez, 26, was arrested in April when the boy's mother, Tequisha Oloizia, discovered the quarter-sized mark on the boy's hip -- in the shape of a dog's paw, a symbol of Fresno's notorious Bulldogs street gang, according to The Associated Press,

Gonzalez allegedly told her that it was just a misunderstanding and that he would have it covered with flesh-covered ink.

Gonzalez and a friend, Travis Gorman, were originally charged with aggravated mayhem, a felony that can result in a life sentence. Defense lawyers argued that the tattoo was no different than circumcision or piercing the ears of a baby girl, according to the AP. The charge of aggravated mayhem was dismissed Oct. 2.

Gonzalez and Gorman still face up to 10 years in jail and are now charged with child endangerment, according to the AP. Because the tattoo is a gang symbol, the two are also charged with enhancements related to gang activity.

Case law required that a certain level of permanent disfigurement be present in order to warrant a charge of aggravated mayhem, according to the AP, and Fresno County Superior Court Judge Hillary Chittick ruled in favor of the defense assertion that a small tattoo does not rise to the level dictated by the law.

Police there have been engaged in a three-year battle with the gang, sweeping neighborhoods and announcing arrests to the media, according to the AP story.

In California, tattooing a child under the age of 18 typically results in a misdemeanor charge.

Public opinion about the story is heated, according to the AP. "I had mothers calling me from Australia wanting to get this guy," said Det. Jesse Ruelas.

Law professor Laurie Levenson, director of the Center for Ethical Advocacy at Loyola Law School told the AP that Gonzalez could argue that he didn't intend to harm his son.

"It's an interesting issue," Levenson said. "I don't think kids belong to their parents. You can give a child the haircut you want him to have, but you can't permanently disfigure a child."