CHULA VISTA, Calif. (CNS) - Larry Millete, the Chula Vista man convicted of murdering his wife, May "Maya" Millete, who vanished without a trace more than five years ago, is set to be sentenced to state prison Monday.
Millete, 45, was found guilty in July of first-degree murder in the death of his wife of 20 years, who has not been seen or heard from since Jan. 7, 2021.
Watch the sentencing live in the player below:
Prosecutors allege Millete killed his wife in their home because she sought a divorce, then loaded her body into an SUV and disposed of her on Jan. 8, during a period of about 12 hours in which his whereabouts remain unknown.
Her body has never been found, but police and prosecutors say there is no evidence to suggest she was alive after that date.
Prosecutors are seeking a sentence of 27 years to life in state prison for Millete, which would involve a 25-year-to-life term for the first-degree murder count, plus a consecutive two-year sentence for an assault weapon possession count Millete to which pleaded guilty to after the trial.
Millete's defense attorneys are expected to argue Monday that Millete should receive a new trial.
SPECIAL SECTION: Search for Maya Millete
Though the defense's position regarding why Millete should receive another trial is uncertain as their motion for a new trial remains sealed, a recurring theme throughout the proceedings was the defense's contentions that its client was not receiving a fair trial because the defense was barred from pointing to Maya Millete's affair partner as a potential suspect.
Prior to the trial's start, Judge Enrique Camarena prohibited the defense from arguing Maya's co-worker, James "Jamey" Laird, had any involvement in her death. In pre-trial filings, the defense argued Laird had a potential motive because of the implications the affair's disclosure could have on his marriage and career.
But Camarena ruled Laird's involvement in the case did not satisfy the legal standard for admitting what's known as third-party culpability evidence. Laird was reportedly at a hospital on the night of Maya's disappearance while his wife was giving birth, though Millete's defense attorneys argued investigators did not fully confirm his alibi.
Deputy District Attorney Christy Bowles argued to jurors that though she could not specifically say how Maya Millete died, Larry Millete was the only person with the means and motive to kill her.
The prosecution's case focused largely on what Bowles described as Larry's possessive and controlling behavior, which included regularly tracking Maya's whereabouts, controlling her finances and ultimately soliciting the assistance of "spellcasters" he believed could magically influence Maya to give up her plans for divorce.
The requests to spellcasters evolved over the months leading to Maya's disappearance from seeking to make her fall in love with him again to making her obey him to causing her to become sick or incapacitated so she would be dependent on him. Bowles argued those messages illustrated his capability to cause his wife physical harm and noted his spell requests abruptly ended following Maya's disappearance.
The prosecutor rejected the notion that Maya voluntarily vanished, noting Maya's plans for the coming year and her devotion to her three children.
Defense attorney Liann Sabatini said in her closing arguments that Larry's behavior was colored by Maya's ongoing affair with Laird and that his conduct that was being classified as stalking was actually Larry conducting a "tragic investigation" in which he was trying to confirm whether Maya was cheating.
Sabatini argued Larry was being psychologically abused and "gaslit" by Maya, who she said was denying the affair to family and friends while at the same time portraying Larry as "crazy" and "the villain" for suspecting it.
While she said jurors might not agree with how Larry handled the situation, Sabatini said, "There is no playbook for heartbreak."
Regarding the murder, Sabatini told jurors they were being asked to speculate rather than rely on facts in a case that lacked a body, crime scene, murder weapon or eyewitnesses.
But Bowles argued the lack of a body was even more compelling evidence that Maya's disappearance was criminal and "so well-planned that it is nothing other than premeditation."
Though Bowles said she could not articulate how exactly Maya was killed, the presence of poison hemlock in the home was referenced in the trial as a potential method. The contents of a vial found inside the Millete home following his arrest tested positive for coniine -- a poisonous compound found in poison hemlock -- and Larry had searched numerous times for poison hemlock online, as well as other methods for killing or incapacitating someone.
Sabatini dismissed the poison theory as "silly," arguing there was no reason for Larry to keep the plant inside his home nearly a year after Maya's disappearance if he was guilty and that it was more likely one of his children picked the plant, as poison hemlock is commonly found throughout San Diego County.
She also argued that Larry searched for the plant as a means to commit suicide due to his despair over his deteriorating marriage.
Surveillance footage captured Maya entering the family's home at around 4:45 p.m. Jan. 7, but no video footage has captured her leaving.
According to trial testimony, her last known contact with anyone was in a text message with one of her sisters at around 8:15 p.m. Jan. 7, then her cellphone terminated all cellular connections at about 1:25 a.m. Jan. 8.
Larry -- whose phone also terminated cell connections on the morning of Jan. 8 -- allegedly left the family's home in an SUV at about 6:45 a.m. and did not return until about 6 that evening.
Copyright 2026, City News Service, Inc.
