All O.C. Judges Barred From 3 Officials’ Cases

SANTA ANA —  All of Orange County’s judges were disqualified Wednesday from hearing bankruptcy-related misconduct cases against two supervisors and the county’s auditor-controller because of the appearance of conflicts of interest.

Superior Court Presiding Judge Theodore Millard said local judges who have a brewing legal battle with the county over court funding might not seem impartial in handling cases against county officials who control their purse strings.

Millard asked that California Chief Justice Malcolm Lucas appoint an outside judge to hear civil misconduct accusations against Board of Supervisors Chairman Roger R. Stanton, Supervisor William G. Steiner and county Auditor-Controller Steve E. Lewis.

The judge’s decision came as a surprise after the Orange County district attorney’s office attempted to remove Superior Court Judge David O. Carter--not the entire bench--from the cases.

“The district attorney shot himself in the foot,” said defense lawyer Allan H. Stokke, who represents Steiner and had argued in court that prosecutors also should be disqualified. “I think the statement the judge made applies as well to the D.A. as it does with the court.”

Attorneys for the elected officials are seeking to remove Dist. Atty. Michael R. Capizzi from the cases, contending that he and his staff are victims of the largest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history and thus have conflicts in handling the matters.

Prosecutors were caught off guard by the judge’s decision, but vowed to continue their cases against Stanton, Steiner and Lewis.

The Orange County Grand Jury filed civil misconduct charges against the three elected officials, alleging that they failed to oversee the high-risk investments of former Treasurer-Tax Collector Robert L. Citron. If the accusations are found to be true by a jury, Stanton, Steiner and Lewis could be removed from office.

In his ruling Wednesday, Millard said he could not ignore the fact that Orange County judges filed a legal notice with the Board of Supervisors two weeks ago warning that courthouses across the county could be shuttered after April 15 because of an impending budget crisis.

The judges have indicated that they may resort to a seldom-used law to force county officials to pay an extra $31 million needed to maintain court services.

Millard said Stanton and Steiner are involved in making decisions on court funding and Lewis and his subordinates “are involved in daily decision-making, which directly affects the court’s budget. . . .”

“These issues of continuing decision-making regarding the court’s operations create the appearance of a conflict that justifies this court in recusing all of the sitting judges,” Millard ruled.

The judge said he had instructed court administrators to ask Lucas, chairman of the state’s Judicial Council, to appoint an outside judge who may travel to Orange County to hear the cases.

Millard’s decision came after the district attorney’s office had taken the unusual step earlier in the day of filing a motion seeking to remove Carter from the case against the three officials.

Assistant Dist. Atty. Wallace J. Wade contended in court papers that the district attorney’s office “cannot have a fair and impartial hearing before such a judge.”

It has become clear that prosecutors have been dissatisfied with Carter’s handling of the bankruptcy-related cases, which include criminal charges against the county’s former treasurer, assistant treasurer and budget director. Carter recently removed himself from the case against ex-budget director Ronald Rubino because the judge had performed Rubino’s wedding ceremony.

In court last week, Carter said Dist. Atty. Capizzi’s assistants had approached two of the county’s top judges seeking to have the case heard in another courtroom. “I take that as a friendly approach at this time,” Carter told prosecutors. “But I suggest that stop immediately.”

On Wednesday, the prosecutors’ motion to recuse Carter was brought to Millard.

After Millard declared that all local judges had possible conflicts of interest in the case, Wade asked to withdraw the motion to remove Carter.

That would have given prosecutors the option of using their single peremptory challenge against an appointed judge at another time if they oppose the selection.

But Millard denied the request, saying the issue would not have come to his court if prosecutors had not filed the recusal motion.

Stokke emerged from court declaring that prosecutors had blundered: “They are stuck with whoever is appointed now.”

The judge’s ruling does not affect defense motions set for Monday that seek to oust the district attorney from prosecuting the cases.

Millard’s ruling also does not include the criminal cases against Rubino, Citron and former Assistant Treasurer Matthew Raabe.