A California appeals court has asked prosecutors to justify their case against a Los Angeles district attorney advisor who was charged with felonies for allegedly accessing confidential police officer information.
The prosecution of Diana Teran, a top ethics official for former Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón, became fodder in last year`s district attorney election in Los Angeles County, which resulted in the election of Nathan Hochman. In April, Teran was accused by California Attorney General Rob Bonta of 11 felonies related to her accessing computer files containing “confidential” information on police officers.
A Los Angeles Superior Court judge later said the prosecution could go ahead on six of those felony charges, and Teran appealed to California’s Second District Appellate Court to end the proceedings against her. The appeals court has ordered prosecutors to appear in the Los Angeles court on April 2 to justify why Teran’s petition for a writ of prohibition should not be approved.
Such an action by an appeals court is unusual and may demonstrate holes in the prosecution’s case, according to some observers.
“Advancing a case beyond a preliminary hearing is widely considered a low bar for any prosecution to clear,” Lisa Hamer, senior staff attorney with the group Fair and Just Prosecution (FJP), told the Southern California Record in an email. “With its Order to Show Cause, the (appeals) court is signaling it has significant concerns that the AG’s case against Ms. Teran cannot clear that bar.”
The Attorney General’s Office is trying to prosecute Teran for accessing court records that were actually available to the public while she performed her job as a prosecutor, according to Hamer.
“...The court is signaling the weakness of the AG’s unorthodox theory of liability,” she said.
FJP, which works with prosecutors to promote justice system reforms, also submitted an amicus brief to the appeals court. The brief argues that Teran’s research into potential police officer misconduct during her employment with both the District Attorney’s Office and the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department (LASD) was within her legal obligations as a prosecutor.
Prosecutors need to access such information in order to fulfill their duties detailed in a 1963 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Brady v. Maryland, according to FJP. The Brady decision states that prosecutors have a duty to disclose evidence favorable to defendants. Such information includes evidence that could raise questions about the credibility of prosecution witnesses.
“The charges brought against Ms. Teran are against the public interest and against the interest of justice,” former Los Angeles County District Attorney Gil Garcetti said in a prepared statement. “This case is an insult to every prosecutor working hard to fulfill their constitutional obligations and to ensure police misconduct does not stay in the shadows.”
Though the police officer files in question are public records, prosecutors argue that Teran accessed deputy personnel records without authorization during her work with the LASD.
As a result of the filing of the felony charges, a “consumer alert” has been placed on Teran’s attorney profile by the California State Bar. The action alerts the public that the matter is pending before the Los Angeles County Superior Court, although the filing of such charges does not demonstrate proof of guilt.
The FJP is urging the appeals court to dismiss the charges against Teran – an action that would reinforce “the importance of ethical and transparent prosecutorial practices.” Otherwise, efforts by prosecutors to investigate and reveal evidence of police misconduct would be hampered, the group said.