Another Inmate Set to Be Freed in Police Probe

The Los Angeles district attorney is expected to seek the release of a third prison inmate on Friday as a result of the unfolding LAPD corruption investigation, and detectives are scrutinizing additional cases that call into question the conduct of more officers, according to sources close to the inquiry.

After spending more than two years behind bars, Ruben Rojas, 30, is expected to have his drug conviction overturned because authorities now believe it was based on fabricated evidence and false testimony by Rampart Division officers.

In addition to Rojas’ case, prosecutors and detectives are focusing on five other convictions that may soon lead to the release or resentencing of inmates, sources said.

Until now, all of the convictions overturned because of the corruption probe involved only former LAPD Officer Rafael Perez and his ex-partner, Nino Durden. Recently, however, Perez--as part of a deal to cut time from his cocaine theft convictions--has provided information about allegedly improper arrests by other officers with whom he worked, sources said.

As part of his cooperation, detectives and members of the department’s SWAT team secretly escorted Perez out of jail at 3 a.m. one day last week to have him “do a walk-through” of the apartment building where Rampart officers killed one man and wounded two others during a 1996 shooting, sources said.

For nearly two hours, investigators videotaped Perez as he sought to re-create key elements of the shooting, which he has characterized as “dirty.”

So far, Perez’s information has led to the release of two men from state prison. One of those men, Javier Francisco Ovando, was allegedly unarmed when he was shot by Perez and Durden in 1996, then framed and sent to prison for 23 years based on the officers’ testimony. Three other men had their convictions overturned last week and another defendant has had charges against him dismissed because of tainted evidence and testimony by the former partners. Perez’s disclosures also have led to more than a dozen officers being relieved of duty. Sources say that the potentially tainted convictions currently under review involve some of those officers.

Rojas, the man expected to be freed Friday, was arrested March 5, 1997, after Perez and Durden allegedly watched him sell rock cocaine to two men near Marathon and Dillon streets. Perez and Durden were working an undercover narcotics detail, dressed in plainclothes and driving an unmarked van. Durden testified at Rojas’ preliminary hearing that he and Perez watched Rojas make two separate drug sales. Both times, Durden testified, the alleged customer handed Rojas money. Rojas walked to a nearby telephone pole, picked up what appeared to be rocks of cocaine, and handed them to the customer.

After the second sale, Durden testified, the partners called for uniformed officers in a marked patrol car to arrest Rojas. As the officers rolled up and detained Rojas at a nearby apartment building, Durden said, he went to the telephone pole and seized the crack cocaine. Perez, meanwhile, went to the apartment building where Rojas was being held by the uniformed officers. According to Durden, Perez searched Rojas and found two bindles of powder cocaine in his front pants pockets. According to court papers, it was Perez who later tested the crack and the powder cocaine for authenticity.

Despite Durden’s testimony that he and Perez witnessed Rojas accept money from both men to whom he allegedly sold drugs, officers did not find any cash at the telephone pole or in Rojas’ possession when he was arrested.

Letter to Judge Proclaims Innocence

Two months after pleading no contest to the charges in a plea bargain that sent him to prison for six years, Rojas wrote a letter to the judge, proclaiming his innocence.

In it, the gang member known as “Li’l Man” said that at the time of the plea he was unaware of a witness who he maintains could have cleared him and that he was given five minutes to make a potentially life-altering decision.

“I was informed that I was facing 25 years to life by my defense counsel and that there was no way I could have won my case because I was up against a police officer,” Rojas wrote in black ink on loose-leaf paper.

“I never did what I was charged for,” Rojas added. “I’m not guilty.”

Last month, in the wake of Perez’s allegations about his own conduct and accusations about Durden’s, Rojas’ defense attorney filed court papers seeking to have his client’s conviction overturned.

Deputy Public Defender David Hizami argued that Perez and Durden are the only officers who can link Rojas to the alleged drug sales, and that both officers have lost their credibility. Moreover, the papers state, Rojas now says that the officers planted the drugs. The district attorney is joining the public defender’s petition, effectively guaranteeing Rojas’ swift release.

In papers filed this week, Gregory A. Yates, the prisoner’s civil attorney, accused police of planting drugs on Rojas after he failed to give them information about the whereabouts of a gang member they were looking for. Yates said Perez, Durden and two other officers who have since been relieved of duty in connection with the Rampart probe arrested Rojas at the apartment where he lived with his sister and mother. According to the documents, which are the precursor to a civil lawsuit, Rojas was wearing boxer shorts when he was arrested.

After Rojas insisted that he did not know where to find the gang member police were looking for, Perez told Rojas he was going to take him to jail, the documents state. When Rojas asked why, Perez told him he would “find something.”

At one point, while en route to the jail at LAPD headquarters, Rojas said, police stopped the car, took him out and unhandcuffed him.

“Officer Perez with his hand on his weapon ordered Rojas to ‘Run!’ ” the documents state. “Rojas did not run at Officer Perez’s command, as he feared he would be shot.”

Rojas was again handcuffed and taken to Parker Center, the papers state. His mother, having learned of her son’s arrest, brought him a pair of jeans to wear. After putting on the jeans, Rojas was searched and the drugs were purportedly found, the papers alleged.

Meanwhile, law enforcement sources say that the other cases under intense scrutiny involve three drug cases and two weapons convictions. At least one inmate, and perhaps others, could be released from prison if investigators are able to corroborate Perez’s information that innocent men were framed. Such corroboration could take several weeks, sources said, noting that detectives have been interviewing the inmates in prison. In Rojas’ case, detectives visited him twice in prison to verify elements of Perez’s story.

In fact, investigators appear to be going to great lengths to confirm the veracity of Perez’s numerous allegations. Such was the case last week when detectives removed Perez from jail and had him attempt to re-create a July 20, 1996, officer-involved shooting that left one man dead and two others injured, sources said.

Perez has characterized that shooting as unjustified. Three Rampart officers who fired their weapons in that case have been relieved of duty pending further investigation of the incident. A fourth officer who also fired has been terminated in connection with an unrelated beating uncovered in the Rampart probe.

Attorney Bruce Brown, who represents one of the men shot by police, has filed court papers seeking information about the shooting uncovered during the ongoing corruption investigation.

Although his client, Oscar Peralta--also known as Jose Perez--was convicted of attacking police, Brown said prosecutors have told him there is evidence that may exonerate Peralta.

“During discussions, the deputy district attorney repeatedly referred to defendant Peralta as a ‘victim’ of a police crime,” Brown wrote in his petition asking a judge to compel the D.A.’s office to turn over evidence in the case.

Authorities have acknowledged that there is evidence that may be helpful to Peralta but have refused to disclose details, saying to do so might hinder the investigation.