Hollywood v. Superior Court

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS OPINION IS DEPUBLISHED UPON GRANTING OF PETITION FOR REVIEW. THE OPINION APPEARS BELOW WITH A GRAY BACKGROUND.]

This is a companion case to Haraguchi v. Superior Court (2006) 143 Cal.App.4th 846 ( Haraguchi ). In this death penalty case, Jesse James Hollywood, petitioner, seeks a writ of mandate directing the respondent trial court to grant his motion to recuse the Office of the District Attorney of Santa Barbara County. In the alternative, petitioner seeks a writ of mandate directing the trial court to conduct a full evidentiary hearing on the recusal motion. Petitioner contends that, because of the role of the assigned prosecutor, Ronald J. Zonen (Zonen), in the making of a film about the case, "that prosecutor has demonstrated a bias and conflict of interest warranting recusal." "Based on the lack of evidence that [the District Attorney] was unaware of the prosecutor's disqualifying conduct," petitioner also contends that the entire prosecutorial office should be recused. We originally summarily denied the petition. The Supreme Court granted review and directed us to issue an order to show cause. We now conclude that the trial court erred by denying the…

I respectfully concur: I agree with my colleagues that our views stated in Haraguchi v. Superior Court (2006) 143 Cal.App.4th 846 ) "apply here as well." (Maj. opn., ante , at p. 868.) I write separately to stress that these views apply irrespective of whether this is a death penalty case. What is "over-arching" here is not the "penalty sought," but the patent conflict that requires recusal whatever the criminal charge. ( Ibid. ) I am mindful that our Supreme Court has echoed United States Supreme Court and federal decisions emphasizing the necessity "to protect more carefully the rights of a defendant who is charged with a capital crime. [Citations.]" ( Keenan v. Superior Court (1982) 31 Cal.3d 424 , 430-431 [ 180 Cal.Rptr. 489 , 640 P.2d 108 ], italics added.) I also acknowledge that there may be cases in which legal principles apply differently because of the idiosyncratic nature of the case. (See In re Joseph G. (1983) 34 Cal.3d 429 [ 194 Cal.Rptr. 163 , 667 P.2d 1176 ].) But this is not one of them. I hope it is not naïve to suggest that a case in which a defendant is charged with a low level misdemeanor should receive as careful attention and scrutiny as the defendant…

Thomas W. Sneddon, Jr., District Attorney, County of Santa Barbara and Gerald McC. Franklin, Senior Deputy District Attorney, for Real Party in Interest.

This is a companion case to Haraguchi v. Superior Court (Oct. 5, 2006, No. B191161) ___ Cal.App.4th ___, 49 Cal. Rptr.3d 590, 2006 WL 2830793 ( Haraguchi ). In this death penalty case, Jesse James Hollywood, petitioner, seeks a writ of mandate directing the respondent trial court to grant his motion to recuse the Office of the District Attorney of Santa Barbara County. In the alternative, petitioner seeks a writ of mandate directing the trial court to conduct a full evidentiary hearing on the recusal motion. Petitioner contends that, because of the role of the assigned prosecutor's, Ronald J. Zonen's (Zonen), role in the making of a film about the case, "that prosecutor has demonstrated a bias and conflict of interest warranting recusal." "Based on the lack of evidence that [the District Attorney] was unaware of the prosecutor's disqualifying conduct," petitioner also contends that the entire prosecutorial office should be recused.

We originally summarily denied the petition. The Supreme Court granted review and…