Lastra

DISCUSSION

Section 1424 “sets forth the procedure for a defendant to seek an order . . . recusing a member of the district attorney’s office, or the office as a whole, for a conflict of interest.” (People v. Griffin (2004) 33 Cal.4th 536, 569.) The procedure “constitutes a statutorily authorized judicial interference with the executive branch’s constitutional role to enforce the law.” (People v. Bryant, Smith and Wheeler (2014) 60 Cal.4th 335, 374.) The trial court may not grant a motion to recuse “unless the evidence shows that a conflict of interest exists that would render it unlikely that the defendant would receive a fair trial.” (Penal Code, § 1424, subd. (a)(1).) A conflict exists “whenever the circumstances of a case evidence a reasonable possibility that the DA’s office may not exercise its discretionary function in an evenhanded manner.” (People v. Conner (1983) 34 Cal.3d 141, 148.) “[S]ection 1424 has been interpreted as providing a two- part test for disqualification. First, the court must determine whether there is a conflict of interest. Second, the court must

5The trial court also granted Arata’s motion to compel discovery from prosecutors relating to alleged…