The San Benito County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to
negotiate a one-year extension of the primary public defender’s
contract Tuesday.
The San Benito County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to negotiate a one-year extension of the primary public defender’s contract Tuesday.
The public defender, Gregory M. LaForge, whose three-year, $260,000 contract would have expired June 30, will be extended until 2005 with no increase in cost.
The ruling included provisions that will allow the Board to explore other options within that one-year period concerning not only other possible candidates for the primary public defender position, but candidates for conflict attorneys.
With a total public defender cost of approximately $600,000 a year, the largest costs the county accrues are from the conflict attorney fees, by which the county contracts out and pays $65 an hour.
The county will now solicit proposals to see whether there are attorneys who would be interested in bidding on a fixed-price contract to provide contract attorneys, said County Administrative Officer Terrence May.
“That would then give your Board the ability later this year or earlier next year to make a decision whether to continue with that arrangement or to solicit proposals for both the primary and the conflict level attorneys,” May said.
Under state law, the county could contract with another county to handle the public defender services for them. Last year, it held preliminary meetings with the public defender’s office in Monterey County to operate both the primary and conflict public defender services for them, but never went ahead with negotiations, May said.
Part of the problem with this system is the “ethical wall” theory, which happens when attorneys in the same office are representing two individuals charged with the same crime.
“Our judges have a certain degree of concern about that,” May said.
They stated in a memo that if the county were to pursue that arrangement with Monterey providing both levels of coverage, that the co-defendants who are convicted here could potentially appeal their cases to a higher court that would throw out the “ethical wall” theory and a number of convictions would be overturned, May said.
During the public comment period of Tuesday’s meeting, District Attorney John Sarsfield spoke in favor of looking at alternate options for the county’s indigent criminal defense services – expressly a “true public defender’s office” with an appointed public defender, chosen by the Board.
He championed the creation of a merged public defender’s office with another county, such as Monterey County, and that it could save the county almost $100,000 a year in contracted conflict attorney fees.
Sarsfield also chastised the behavior of county-contracted attorneys, citing unprofessional behavior and harassment of deputies in his office has created a “circus-like atmosphere” of the county’s criminal justice system.
“(People) impersonating members of my staff, one deputy was threatened, accusations of racism and other types of libel and slander,” Sarsfield said. “This is the sort of conduct that would not be tolerated if we had a real public defender’s office. And it’s not a reflection on the quality of legal service being provided because I have no comment on that at all.”
With a “status quo” coming out of LaForge’s office that he finds unacceptable, Sarsfield appealed to the Board that they not make any decisions until more information is presented to them because there are too many unanswered questions regarding the current indigent defense services situation.
After a lengthy speech that included criticism of the public defender’s current salary of $260,000 in relation to his deputy district attorney’s salaries of $85,000, his office’s heightened work load and budget cuts, May asked if Sarsfield was trying to influence the Board’s selection of an attorney to oppose his office in court.
“You came into my office and told me on Friday, January 9, that it was not acceptable for this county to employ any of the people that are currently opposing you in court,” May said. “You said, ‘I don’t care who you select, Mr. May, whether it’s Monterey County, it can be any other county in the state, but it better not be LaForge, it better not be (Arthur) Cantu, it better not be (Harry) Damkar.'”
“That is not what I said,” Sarsfield said.
“That’s exactly what you said,” May said.
Damkar, the past district attorney who is now a defense attorney, and Cantu, a defense attorney, have opposed some of Sarsfield’s actions since he took office – along with LaForge.
“The DA’s a liar,” LaForge said. “He was a deputy district attorney in Monterey County for 13 years and now he wants Monterey County in here so he can have his little kingdom and there won’t be any attorneys that will ruffle his feathers.”
The Board’s unanimous approval of continuing LaForge’s contract speaks volumes about what they thought of Sarsfield’s appeal at the meeting, LaForge said.
The fact that the Board will open the public defender’s position to bids from various attorneys doesn’t bother LaForge, but bullying by the district attorney does, he said.
“Competition is good, it’s how I got the job. I’m not against it, it’s the nature of the beast,” LaForge said. “If Sarsfield continues to interfere with my contract, based on the fact that he said LaForge, Cantu and Damkar had to go, I consider that an intentional interference of my business contract with the county of San Benito, and I’m contemplating litigation against Mr. Sarsfield personally for doing this if he in fact succeeds.”
Sarsfield was pleased with the Board’s decision, and isn’t upset about the continuance of LaForge’s contract, he said.
“What I asked for was to have hearings based on all the information and we’re going to have hearings in the fall or early next year,” he said. “I think it’s great.”
Any interference by the district attorney’s office into the public defender services is a compromising of justice and isn’t right, LaForge said.
“He’s not God,” LaForge said. “He doesn’t control the criminal justice system. He’s talking about a circus-like atmosphere in court – there was nothing like this before he got here, so who’s the jester?”
