Deputy’s Arrest Casts Doubt on Trial Testimony

The arrest of an Orange County Sheriff’s deputy on suspicion of trying to erase patrol car videotapes has prompted prosecutors to dismiss two cases in which he was expected to testify, and the public defender’s office is reviewing other cases involving the deputy.

Prosecutors contend that Deputy George Kluchonic asked a civilian employee to erase videotapes of his dealings with two crime suspects, including one he allegedly cursed at and shoved onto the hood of a car.

The misdemeanor charges of attempted evidence destruction could present credibility problems for Kluchonic in trials and could lead to appeals by suspects convicted because of his testimony, defense lawyers and legal experts said.

“If he’s a critical witness with little or no corroboration, then the prosecution will have significant problems,” said Brent Romney, a professor at Western State University College of Law in Fullerton and and a former Orange County prosecutor.

Orange County Public Defender Carl Holmes said his staff will likely take the unusual step of serving a subpoena on the Sheriff’s Department for a list of every arrest Kluchonic has made and then consider appealing convictions based on his testimony.

Already, the charges against Kluchonic, 43, have prompted the end of two criminal cases.

One involved the Oct. 23 arrest of a Trabuco Canyon man accused of methamphetamine possession. Kluchonic testified at a preliminary hearing that the suspect dropped a cigarette pack containing a small amount of the illegal drug. But because of the charges against Kluchonic, prosecutors dismissed the case last week.

The second case involved a youth who allegedly resisted arrest when Kluchonic tried to detain him after a family dispute. Prosecutors dropped a charge of resisting arrest after viewing a tape that showed Kluchonic cursing and shoving suspect Cory Baima.

This week, Baima filed a claim against the department seeking damages for false arrest and assault. A Sheriff’s Department spokesman declined to comment on the allegations.

Kluchonic, who has denied wrongdoing, is on paid administrative leave. The 15-year department veteran is a former Army military police officer and past recipient of the south Orange County deputy of the year award.

Kluchonic’s lawyer blamed the charges on a misunderstanding and said another sheriff’s employee disputes that he sought to erase the tapes.

Still, attorneys at the public defender’s office expressed concern over the allegations and said they would seek to challenge his credibility if he were called as a witness in any pending trials.

“The fact that he has previously tried to suppress evidence which may have been helpful to a defendant raises serious issues about his credibility and whether the evidence he has procured is accurate,” Holmes said.

The nature of the charges against Kluchonic portrays him in a negative light and puts his credibility in jeopardy, especially in cases in which he was the only witness, legal experts said.

Romney sees a parallel in larger police corruption probes such as the Los Angeles Police Department’s Rampart inquiry, which has resulted in inmates being released from prison after revelations about officers’ credibility cast doubt on their convictions.

“The obvious inference is if he tampered with evidence in one case, he can’t be trusted in others,” Romney said.

Kluchonic could invoke his 5th Amendment protection if questioned about the allegations by defense attorneys, Romney said. And while the most significant impact will be in upcoming trials, defense attorneys could use the new allegations to appeal past convictions.

“If a defendant was convicted based primarily on this officer’s testimony, with little or no corroboration, that might be grounds for granting a writ,” Romney said.