Advertisement

Public Defender OKd for Suspect in Dally Slaying

Share
SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

The Ventura County public defender has a right to represent slaying suspect Diana J. Haun even though she has not been charged with any crime, a judge ruled Thursday.

But Superior Court Judge Frederick A. Jones ordered the public defender to ensure that Haun does not have enough money to hire her own counsel. Haun did not appear in court.

“She may be required to repay the county for the representation,” Jones said, adding that a hearing could be held after the case is finally settled to see if Haun has the resources to pay for an attorney.

Advertisement

Investigators call Haun their chief suspect in the slaying of Sherri Renee Dally, the 35-year-old Ventura mother of two who disappeared May 6. Dally’s remains were found Saturday in a barranca north of Ventura. Her mother said Thursday that Dally will be buried at Ivy Lawn Cemetery in Ventura on June 15.

Haun was arrested May 18 and held for four days on suspicion of kidnapping and killing Dally, but was released from jail after investigators said they did not have enough evidence to keep her in custody. She requested the public defender’s services while in jail, Deputy Public Defender Neil B. Quinn said.

Haun has been romantically linked to Dally’s husband, Michael Dally, by co-workers and friends.

Prosecutors argued Thursday that Quinn’s involvement has impeded their investigation and complained that, because Haun has not been charged, the public defender has no right to represent her.

“There is a difference between representing people who we are trying to catch and who are already caught,” prosecutor Kevin G. DeNoce unsuccessfully argued.

*

But Jones dismissed that argument and said Haun has a constitutional right to a public defender.

Advertisement

“If the public defender wishes to undertake representation of this person, that is an exercise of his discretion that should not be disturbed by this court or interfered with by [prosecutors],” Jones ruled.

Public Defender Kenneth I. Clayman, who attended the hearing, said afterward that anybody who is under a criminal investigation and cannot afford an attorney has the right to his office’s service.

“It has always been clear that we have a right to do this,” Clayman said.

Quinn also noted that complex cases require more expensive legal representation, which the public defender’s office factors in to determining financial requirements for representation. For instance, it costs more to defend a murder suspect than it does a drunk driving defendant, Quinn said.

If Haun is ultimately charged with Dally’s slaying--and investigators decline to say whether they plan to charge the grocery clerk with a crime--she would require legal services that would cause a private attorney to dedicate hundreds of hours to the case.

The prosecution and defense also argued Thursday about unsealing a search warrant served at Haun’s Port Hueneme house, but Jones did not decide the issue Thursday.

*

Quinn wants the warrant unsealed. Jones sealed the document before it was served at prosecutors’ request.

Advertisement

“Everyone has the right to ask the police, ‘Why did you come to my house and why did you seize my property?’ ” Quinn argued. Typically, search warrants are made public within 10 days after the search.

But on rare occasions, judges keep the warrants confidential if they are convinced that unsealing them would hinder a criminal investigation, which was DeNoce’s argument Thursday.

“Releasing that information would clearly compromise public safety and jeopardize the investigation,” DeNoce said. He also said Quinn was trying to get “law enforcement to tip its hand to a murder suspect and let you know what cards we are holding.”

Authorities must have “probable cause” that a crime was committed to serve a search warrant, and DeNoce argued that investigators would have to tell Haun about the solid evidence they had against her if her warrant was made public.

Quinn responded: “Why was Ms. Haun released from jail if [prosecutors] had probable cause?”

Jones is expected to rule on the matter today.

*

Times correspondent Andrew D. Blechman contributed to this story.

Advertisement