Choice of Lawyers Clouds Ramirez Case : Family Bid to Substitute Private Attorney for Defenders Adds to Turmoil

A persistent effort by relatives of Night Stalker suspect Richard Ramirez to substitute a private attorney for the public defenders named to represent him is causing new turmoil in the already controversial case.

The Los Angeles County district attorney’s office, which has charged Ramirez with 14 murders and 54 other felonies, is worried that continuing discord between the 25-year-old El Paso drifter and his public defenders--and continuing uncertainty over who will ultimately represent Ramirez--may further delay court proceedings and hurt the prosecution.

“Any time a trial is delayed, you have the potential for the unavailability of witnesses,” said Chief Deputy Dist. Atty. Gilbert I. Garcetti. In this case, Garcetti said, because so many witnesses are elderly, “they may have died or they may have become mentally or physically unable to get into the courtroom.”

Prejudicial Remarks Feared

Ramirez’s public defenders, Allen R. Adashek and Henry J. Hall, are concerned that the public comments of family members and an El Paso attorney who says he is trying to help Ramirez find a new lawyer may prejudice the rights of their client.

In an interview Friday, Hall said attorney Manuel J. Barraza should not continue to talk to the news media about his private conversations with Ramirez because Barraza is bound by a court order that forbids such discussions.

“My position is the gag order does apply to him,” Hall said of Barraza. “He is also a potential witness, and I would also expect him to abide by the attorney-client privilege.”

Barraza, who maintains that he has been retained by members of Ramirez’s family to help in the case, says he does not believe he is restrained by the order.

Adashek has already said that the massive amount of publicity focused on Ramirez will make it difficult for him to get a fair trial. One attorney described the atmosphere surrounding the case as “circus-like.”

Another complication could arise, some courthouse observers suggested, if the public defender’s office eventually disqualifies itself from the Ramirez case because of a conflict of interest. A conflict could develop if the office discovers that it has in the past represented any of the many potential witnesses now being identified by prosecutors.

If that happens, a judge would appoint a private lawyer for Ramirez at county expense, further delaying the proceedings. Los Angeles Municipal Judge Elva R. Soper has already determined that Ramirez cannot afford to pay for his own lawyer.

“We have seen instances in which the public defender’s office has declared a conflict where, in our opinion . . . that conflict was exceedingly remote,” Garcetti said.

Hall conceded that withdrawal from the case is a possibility. However, he added that at the moment, “I don’t see any evidence that a conflict exists. We’re certainly planning on representing Mr. Ramirez through the conclusion of this case.”

Reached by telephone in El Paso, attorney Barraza said he does not believe he is bound by the court’s gag order and asserted that he is only trying to help Ramirez find an attorney he can fully trust.

Barraza, who talked with Ramirez in Los Angeles County Jail last Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, likened the relationship between Ramirez and his public defenders to “a roller coaster . . . confidence high, confidence low, total distrust. . . .” However, at their last meeting Thursday, Barraza said Ramirez appeared more favorably inclined toward his attorneys.

Speculation about disagreements between Ramirez and his public defenders was fanned Sept. 27, when Ramirez was arraigned on 60 new felony charges.

Excluded From Court

During his arraignment, Ramirez was excluded from court but listened to the proceedings over a loudspeaker placed near his holding cell behind the courtroom.

Adashek, Hall and Deputy Dist. Atty. P. Philip Halpin, who is prosecuting Ramirez, have refused to discuss what prompted that procedure, citing the gag order imposed by Soper. Legal experts have said that a defendant can be excluded from court proceedings over his objection only at the request of his defense attorney, usually because the lawyer believes his client’s appearance might somehow prejudice his case.

Barraza said the public defender’s office asked that Ramirez be kept out of court because he planned to make public comments about his dissatisfaction with his lawyers.

“One of the issues he wanted to address at that time was a change in counsel,” Barraza said. “There is no doubt he wanted to talk to the court.”

Inaccuracies Charged

The lawyer said that reports quoting Ramirez’s sister, Rosa Flores, as saying Ramirez had planned to enter guilty pleas to some of the charges against him were inaccurate.

“I don’t think he would have still kept trying to either iron things out with Adashek, or request the family to keep looking (for another attorney) if he was uncaring or going to plead guilty. He wouldn’t keep prodding us to keep our search up,” Barraza said.

“At all times, he’s insisted that the state meet its burden of proof and that he get his right to his day in court.”

Ramirez is due back in court Oct. 17, when he is scheduled to enter pleas to the charges against him. Later, a Municipal Court judge will preside over a preliminary hearing to determine if the district attorney has enough evidence to hold Ramirez for trial.

Ramirez was arrested Aug. 31 in East Los Angeles. He is also charged with a murder and attempted murder in San Francisco, and will probably be prosecuted there after the Los Angeles trial.

Appearance Held Likely

Hall said that he does not anticipate that Ramirez will again be excluded from court. “The judge makes the final decision, obviously, but I don’t see that being an issue in the future,” Hall said.

In any event, Garcetti said, Ramirez has a right to directly ask a judge to listen to his concerns, either in open court or during a private hearing in the judge’s chambers.

Because of Ramirez’s problems with his public defenders, Barraza said, Ramirez’s relatives in recent weeks have contacted several attorneys about taking the case, even though the family does not have enough money to pay them.

San Francisco lawyer Melvin Belli visited with Ramirez last month, but later told reporters he was too busy to accept the case. Barraza said he could not afford to spend the two years or so the case would require without being paid.

Critics have accused Barraza of injecting himself into the case for publicity and complicating Ramirez’s defense by commenting to the media about his private conversations with the Night Stalker suspect.

“I think that is unfair criticism,” Barraza said. “You do get publicity, but I think the primary goal has to be to help the individual and help the family. I can’t help it if it becomes newsworthy. . . . I don’t care what people think about it.”