Legal Question in Criminal Law in California

Re: conflict of interest

There is no conflict that I can see, and even if there were it would have worked in your favor since it would have made the D.A. more sympathetic to your interests rather than less. If he and your sister were bitter enemies instead of good friends you would have a better argument, but even there I'm not sure it would have been enough.

It sounds like your sister was just an observer at your sentencing, but realtives are often in court for sentencing and this is not a problem legally. If she was actually working as the court reporter she should have told the court she was your sister and let another reporter handle the proceeding. But if she didn't do this it would not affect your rights at all, unless she inaccurately transcribed the hearing *and* the errors in the transcript were *later* used as the basis for rulings against you which would have been more favorable to you but for the errors. This seems extremely unlikely, but it would be a sound basis for a habeas corpus petition.

Even all of this did happen, the only person who would get into trouble for it would be your sister; her mistake has no bearing on whether the prosecutor acted properly.

Sorry I can't be more encouraging.

Re: conflict of interest

You mentioned that your sister worked as a court reporter a couple of court rooms away from where your matter had been heard, but said that the DA made his arguments in front of her. I am not clear if she acted as the court reporter during your particular proceeding, if she was merely an observer or discussed you matter with her by the water cooler.

If she was the court reporter, then there could have been a conflict of interest and she should have dismissed herself from acting as the C.R. during your trial. If she was merely observing the proceedings, then there was no conflict.

Regarding the defamation by the DA, one cannot be defamed in court. This is one of the limitations with defamation. If defamation were actionable during court proceedings, justice would then be impaired since litigants would have to be too careful about their arguments. E.g., if A sues B for a tortuous act and loses, but B really committed the act, then B may have an action for defamation against A regardless. Therefore, the DA's conduct is not actionable.

Regarding your past drug use or lack thereof, are you sure the DA had the right file? Did your attorney share the discovery with you? As far as accusations of being a drug user, I believe that the DA should have had evidence to support his theory; otherwise I feel that your attorney should have objected on the grounds of, "Assumes facts not in evidence."

The good news is family should love you no matter what.

Good luck...if you need further legal assistance, please feel free to contact my office at 818.943.0462.