Share This Page

Attorney fights Hampton man's arrest on desertion charge

| Monday, July 14, 2014, 7:36 p.m.

A Hampton man arrested as an Army deserter received a medical discharge in 2000 and should be released, his lawyer said Monday in an emergency motion in federal court.

Gary Vinicie Naranjo, 49, was taken away Sunday without his medicine and neither his wife nor his lawyer have been allowed to see him, Efrem Grail, his attorney, says in the motion. Naranjo starts suffering adverse health effects when he's been off his medicine for more than 24 hours, according to the motion.

Grail couldn't be reached for comment. There was no phone listing for the Naranjo household.

Naranjo served in the Army from 1985 until his discharge in 2000, the lawsuit says. It's not clear when the Army says Naranjo deserted.

A staff member at the personnel controller office in Fort Sill, Okla., told Grail that the Army sent a desertion notice to Naranjo's father in 2010, the lawsuit says. An Army form included as an exhibit to the lawsuit says that Naranjo's “time of absence” was Jan. 1, 2011.

Naranjo has lived and worked in Allegheny County for more than 12 years, the lawsuit says.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.