Prosecutors seek to remove Rebecca Grossman’s lawyer over conflict

Rebecca Grossman and a high advisor to the Los Angeles County district lawyer who helped oversee the convicted assassin’s prosecution and is now dealing with felony fees herself shouldn’t be represented by the identical lawyer, prosecutors stated in a movement that will probably be argued in courtroom Friday.

The movement comes on the identical time a protection movement is seeking a new trial for Grossman, who was convicted in February of second-degree murder within the 2020 deaths of Mark and Jacob Iskander.

The D.A.’s workplace, which earlier modified the lead attorneys within the case, is asking the choose to take away her new lawyer, James Spertus, or have Grossman formally waive a battle of curiosity. The battle, they argue, is as a result of Spertus additionally represents Assistant Dist. Atty. Diana Teran, who till she was charged with 11 felonies last month in reference to the unlawful use of confidential sheriff’s data, oversaw the chain of command for the Grossman prosecutors.

Prosecutors allege Spertus was already representing Teran when he took over Grossman’s case in March. In a movement filed Wednesday, they stated, “Teran was aware about confidential lawyer work product and has an intimate data of the information of the [Grossman] case. … She was briefed every day about courtroom proceedings. These briefs included detailed lawyer work product, privileged writings containing the prosecution crew’s opinions and techniques on all issues, together with upcoming sentencing and new trial proceedings.”

“At instances, Ms. Teran was a decision-maker on points affecting the prosecution and sentencing of the case,” Deputy Dist. Attys. Habib Balian, Ryan Gould and Jamie Castro wrote within the movement in search of to deal with the battle of curiosity.

Prosecutors famous that Spertus was employed not just for Grossman’s sentencing — which has been delayed till a minimum of June — but in addition to hunt a brand new trial. As such, he may declare inaccurate jury directions or proof rulings. Protection attorneys can also argue prosecutorial misconduct or malicious prosecution when in search of a brand new trial.

Balian, Gould and Castro argue that if Spertus needed to lift such claims, he must implicate Teran, “as she was concerned in decision-making on this case” — a battle contemplating she is his shopper in one other authorized matter.

And if Spertus doesn’t pursue such claims, “Ms. Grossman can declare ineffective help of counsel in her attraction,” the prosecutors stated.

“In both state of affairs, it’s irrefutable proof that reveals an precise battle exists right here. Because of this battle, the courtroom ought to correctly resolve this battle,” they argued.

The choose, prosecutors acknowledged, has broad discretion in deciding whether or not a waiver is enough to treatment the battle or if Spertus have to be eliminated.

Spertus has stated no battle exists as a result of in each circumstances, he’s antagonistic to the prosecution.

“There was by no means any battle between Ms. Teran’s case and Ms. Grossman’s” case,” he stated in an e mail to The Occasions. “I agreed to signify Ms. Grossman lengthy earlier than I ever agreed to signify Ms. Teran in her present matter, and people two issues don’t have anything to do with each other.”

Data present the Spertus’ legislation agency represented Teran in a deposition involving a county lawsuit after which Sheriff Alex Villaneuva in December 2019 by which deputy data have been mentioned. Spertus’ colleague Samuel Josephs was Teran’s lawyer throughout the questioning. Josephs appeared in courtroom for Grossman in March.

Spertus acknowledged in an e mail to The Occasions that he represented Teran in a civil case in 2019 and stated the illustration ended when the deposition concluded.

“I didn’t signify Ms. Teran once more till April 2024” Spertus stated. That’s when Teran was charged with improperly downloading confidential police records in 2018 — whereas she was the constitutional policing advisor to the L.A. County Sheriff’s Division — after which utilizing that information when she joined the D.A.’s workplace in 2021.

“I didn’t know Ms. Teran could be modified after I took Ms. Grossman’s case,” Spertus stated.

Nonetheless, the potential battle troubled the district lawyer’s workplace sufficient that it eliminated the lead prosecutors from the Grossman case.

However after public objections by Nancy and Karim Iskander, the dad and mom of the 8- and 11-year-old brothers killed by Grossman, the D.A.’s workplace backtracked. Whereas they nonetheless changed prosecuting supervisor Garrett Dameron — who reported to Teran — with Balian, they reinstated unique prosecutors Gould and Castro however moved them into assistant roles.

Based on an e mail by Dameron written Friday to his superiors, the adjustments have been made solely after his crew instructed that Spertus may find yourself questioning Teran’s choices within the case.

Chief Deputy Dist. Atty. Joseph Iniguez on Monday stated Gould and Castro will stay on the case. Iniguez stated he determined a change of command was wanted to distance the prosecutorial crew from Teran, whose charging led to uncommon circumstances.

“There was a perceived inner battle with these supervisors having reported to an lawyer [Teran] represented by the identical lawyer as Ms. Grossman,” Iniguez stated.

Dameron’s e mail, which was reviewed by The Occasions, additionally confirmed that Teran made an vital choice on the case after Spertus grew to become Grossman’s lawyer.

Based on the e-mail, prosecutors “grew to become conscious of a witness who had vital info relating to Grossman’s continued efforts to obstruct justice from inside the county jail” shortly after Spertus grew to become her lawyer on March 22.

Based mostly on recorded jailhouse phone calls, prosecutors have been conscious Grossman was attempting to have her husband and daughter discuss to trial witnesses to alter their testimony. The jailhouse witness had info vital to “preserving the integrity of our verdict and the protection of our witnesses,” Dameron wrote.

“As instructed, I despatched a request to interview the witness to Teran,” Dameron wrote. “To our shock, Teran denied our request to conduct this interview. I repeatedly requested for an evidence and was not given one.”