LA DA backtracks slightly on judge ‘papering,’ sentence enhancements

After a spokesman for District Attorney George Gascon said a Los Angeles County judge had changed her practice of refusing dismissals of sentencing enhancements following a request to remove her from criminal cases, two persons with close knowledge of the courtroom proceedings said the judge has made no change in her practice.

On Friday, the spokesman, Maxwell Szabo, said in an interview the DA's office is no longer seeking to "paper" Judge Shellie L. Samuels in the Van Nuys Courthouse.

"So, initially, the court made a blanket statement about her disdain for these policies, which suggests that she was prejudiced," Szabo said in a phone interview Friday. "If she has subsequently shown she is reviewing cases on a case-by-case basis -- and while we believe that these cases should be dismissed in the interest of justice -- despite the fact she made those initial statements, her actions are demonstrating that she is open to and recognizes the need to review these cases individually."

The two sources, who spoke on condition they not be identified by name, said that Samuels, who has been on the bench for 10 years and had a 25-year career as a deputy DA, has not changed her longtime practice of considering each case individually. They said she had granted at least one of the motions sought by Gascon and denied others in the interest of justice.

After receiving heavy backlash from prosecutors and victim's rights advocates about his directives, Gascon sent a memo to his deputies Friday, announcing he would reduce the list of enhancements they are banned from adding to charges to increase sentences.

"After listening to the community, victims, and my deputy district attorneys, I have reevaluated Special Directive 20-08 and hereby amend it to allow enhanced sentences in cases involving the most vulnerable victims and in specified extraordinary circumstances," Gascon wrote. "These exceptions shall be narrowly construed."

Enhancements based on hate crimes, elder and dependent adult abuse, child physical abuse, child and adult sexual abuse, and human sex trafficking allegations, were among the ones Gascon had previously ordered his deputies to file motions to dismiss. However they are no longer required to do so.

On another front, the Association of Deputy District Attorneys for Los Angeles released a statement Friday -- its first public one since Gascon won the November election --criticizing his spokesman, Szabo, for disparaging a prosecutor in a public statement and for representing that he is the spokesman for the district attorney's office. The association said Szabo does not work for the DA's office, has never been a prosecutor, and became an attorney in May 2019.

The association said Szabo had disparaged a prosecutor who had told a judge he would not file a motion to dismiss sentencing enhancements against a woman accused of beating and torturing her 4-year-old child to death.

"Maxwell Szabo . . . attacked our member, Deputy District Attorney Jon Hatami, referring to him as 'delusional' and questioning his fitness to practice law," the association statement reads. "Deputy District Attorney Hatami, like all of our members, is a tireless advocate for victims. He is a veteran prosecutor with a wealth of experience in prosecuting child murderers."

It ended, "We demand these public attacks on our members cease."

Despite retracting his request to paper Samuels, Gascon issued another directive Tuesday, ordering his deputies to provide their superiors with the names of any judge who refuses to grant motions to dismiss enhancements.

"If a court further refuses to accept an amended charging document ..., the DDA shall provide the following information to their head deputy: Case number, date of hearing, name of the bench officer and the court's justification for denying the motion (if any)," the Dec. 15 memo reads.

Under Code of Civil Procedure Sections 170.6, also known as "papering" a judge, any party or a representative of a party to an action can disqualify the judge assigned to the case if the party believes the judge is biased or prejudiced against them. In Samuels' case, she would have been precluded from hearing any further proceedings filed by the DA's office, most likely the majority of her calendar.

Samuels did not respond to phone calls and emails seeking her response to the events and comments.