Prosecutors Unite in Boycott of Judge

The Los Angeles County district attorney’s office announced Friday that prosecutors will no longer try cases before Van Nuys Superior Court Judge Melvin B. Grover because they believe he is prejudiced in favor of defendants.

The unusual action, which capped months of acrimony between prosecutors and Grover, means that Grover will handle only civil cases, said Judge James Albracht, who coordinates the calendar of criminal cases in Van Nuys Superior Court. Grover, 64, was appointed to the bench three years ago.

Evidence Not Needed

Staff members of the Van Nuys branch of the district attorney’s office said they could not recall prosecutors’ having taken such an action against another judge at the Van Nuys courthouse.

Under state law, the prosecution and the defense have one opportunity each per case to “bump” a judge by filing an “affidavit of prejudice” that need not be supported by evidence.

If the judge already has made some legal findings on the merits of a case, however, he cannot be removed from it without a hearing before another judge to prove the allegations of bias.

Mike Carroll, head deputy of the district attorney’s Van Nuys office, said Friday that prosecutors will file papers on every criminal case assigned to Grover’s court, amounting to a “blanket affidavit” against him.

Four such affidavits were filed against Grover on Friday.

Gilbert Garcetti, second in command to District Attorney Ira Reiner, said he made the decision to serve Grover with a “blanket affidavit” after interviewing prosecutors in Van Nuys and consulting Reiner. Garcetti said the decision was based on a litany of accusations from prosecutors that Grover is biased against them.

Grover declined to comment on the action by the district attorney’s office, saying it would be “inappropriate” for him to engage in such a public debate with prosecutors.

Several defense attorneys and judges, however, rushed to Grover’s defense, describing him as a strong-willed but fair judge who is impatient with unprepared attorneys.

“They’re unhappy with the judge because he is too independent,” said Mark Kaiserman, deputy public defender. “They want judges who bow to their wishes all the time.”

Friday’s announcement marked the third time in a year that the office has moved to exclude a judge in the county from criminal cases, Garcetti said. The other two judges were in Pasadena Superior Court and downtown Los Angeles Superior Court, he said.

“We view any request for a blanket affidavit with extreme care and caution,” Garcetti said. “What we look for is a continuing practice of unfairness and a lack of impartiality.”

Prosecutors have complained that Grover does not allow them to complete their arguments before making a ruling and that he does not allow juries to hear key parts of the prosecution’s evidence and testimony.

Grover infuriated prosecutors in February by refusing to allow a 3-year-old girl to testify that she saw her father shoot her mother, leading to the dismissal of a murder charge against Harry J. Conklin of Reseda. After interviewing the child on the witness stand, Grover said she was “an infant” and would have difficulty giving credible testimony.

Runyan Case

Last month, the simmering dispute came to a boil during the manslaughter trial of Melody Kay Runyan, 25, of Van Nuys, who admitted killing her ex-boyfriend but said she acted in self-defense. Deputy Dist. Atty. Linda Greenberg, the prosecutor on the case, had several arguments with Grover in court and was reprimanded by the judge for her behavior.

The jury was unable to reach a verdict in the case, and Grover on Friday refused to grant a retrial, dismissing the charges against Runyan.

“Judge Grover regretfully lacks the most basic requirement, the cornerstone of our judicial system--fairness and impartiality,” Garcetti said. “We’re not getting a fair shot. It’s totally unacceptable; it’s intolerable.”

But Kaiserman said the district attorney has too much power over which judges hear criminal cases. “The district attorney can remove someone at will,” he said.

Defense Has Less Power

Kaiserman noted that he and other public defenders do not have the power to completely remove a judge from working on criminal cases because so many criminal defendants are represented by private attorneys. All those attorneys also would have to file affidavits of prejudice to keep the judge from hearing criminal cases.

William Misener, a deputy public defender, said Grover is a “great judge” who expects attorneys to act professionally in his courtroom.

Albracht, too, supported Grover, calling him a competent judge of criminal cases and a “pleasant, nice, humorous fellow.”

Albracht said that, if prosecutors keep their vow, the cases that would have gone to Grover will be reassigned to other Van Nuys courtrooms. In some instances, Albracht said, judges who now handle only civil cases may be asked to hear criminal cases and shift some of their civil workload to Grover.

Another Judge Transferred

Although prosecutors said they could not recall having taken a similar action against a judge in Van Nuys, Albracht said prosecutors threatened to withhold criminal cases from another judge there during the 1970s. That threat prompted the transfer of the judge, who is now retired, to a civil court downtown, Albracht said, meaning that he was effectively “frozen out” of criminal cases.

Two other judges now assigned to Van Nuys Superior Court were hit with blanket affidavits while serving at other courthouses in the county and were subsequently transferred to Van Nuys to handle civil cases, Albracht said. Judges and prosecutors identified them as G. Keith Wisot and Martha Goldin.

Wisot and Goldin could not be reached for comment.

Attorneys who practice at the courthouse noted that Albracht could easily frustrate the district attorney’s effort to keep certain judges away from criminal cases. He could, for instance, force prosecutors to exhaust their one affidavit per case on Grover and then assign his cases to Wisot or Goldin, they said.

Action Unlikely

But one prosecutor said such an action would trigger “open warfare” between prosecutors and the bench. The prosecutor expressed confidence that Albracht, who is one of the best-liked judges in the courthouse, would not take such an action.

Grover seems an unlikely candidate to be served an affidavit by prosecutors, having spent 10 years as a law-enforcement officer.

“He is not exactly a bleeding heart,” one criminal-defense attorney said.

Grover served with the Santa Barbara Police Department and the California Highway Patrol before becoming an attorney. He started practicing law in 1955 and eventually specialized in civil trial work, often defending insurance companies, according to a November, 1983, judicial profile in the Los Angeles Daily Journal.

Appointed by Brown

Grover, a Republican, was appointed to the bench by former Gov. Edmund G. Brown Jr. on Jan. 1, 1982, and served for eight months in Compton Superior Court before being transferred to Van Nuys.

The four affidavits of prejudice submitted against Grover on Friday were in cases scheduled for arraignment. Those matters were reassigned to the courtroom of Judge Darlene E. Schempp. Schempp is on a one-month vacation, and her workload is being handled by newly appointed Judge David Schacter, who was sent to Van Nuys on Wednesday by Thomas T. Johnson, presiding judge of Los Angeles County Superior Court.

Johnson said in an interview that he could have reassigned Grover to civil work downtown but that Grover wished to stay in Van Nuys for the immediate future and that his Van Nuys colleagues supported that decision.