Santa Clara Prosecutor Ben Field Convicted of Prosecutory Misconduct

[GoldySJSU]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

In my case where I was prosecuted by the Santa Clara District Attorney, I was not notified of this problem with my prosecutor, Ben Field.

California Bar Juornal:

[url=http://www.ca.calsb.org/state/calbar/calbar_cbj.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@1486896958.1257529307@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccceadeikflekljcfngcfkmdffidfn g.0&sCatHtmlTitle=Top%20Headlines&sCatHtmlPath=cbj/2008-07_TH_04_Misconduct-charges.html&sCategoryPath=/Home/Attorney%20Resources/California%20Bar%20Journal/July2008]California Bar Journal[/url]

{Misconduct charges for 3 prosecutors
By Nancy McCarthy
Staff Writer

In three disciplinary cases pending before the State Bar Court, current or former deputy district attorneys are charged with committing acts of moral turpitude and disobeying the law. The bar alleges that two of those charged withheld exculpatory evidence.

In each matter, the bar is seeking either disbarment or a lengthy suspension.

Santa Clara County deputy district attorney Benjamin T. Field currently is on trial, facing 22 counts of misconduct in four matters. Each set of charges results from Field’s alleged violations of court orders.

In the case that has drawn the most attention — and filled a bar courtroom with spectators — Field is aggressively fighting the charges. His attorney Allen Ruby says his client is “not guilty. He’s innocent.”

Field’s trial began in May but was continued last month after the Court of Appeal reversed a case on the grounds Field committed prosecutorial misconduct. The bar filed five additional charges.

The appellate court found that Field made “deceptive and reprehensible” comments to a jury that violated a court order. In that matter, the district attorney filed a petition to commit Dariel Shazier, convicted of sexual misconduct in 1994, as a sexually violent predator. Shazier successfully moved to prevent witnesses from telling the jury what would happen if his petition were granted: he would have been treated in a hospital rather than be sent to prison.

In closing arguments, Field told the jury, “. . . I’m saying also that you should not make a decision based on what you think it’s going to be like for the respondent in Atascadero State Hospital.” The Court of Appeal wrote that the “statement made it ‘crystal clear to this jury. Don’t worry about [defendant], he’s just going to the hospital. He’ll get his treatment.’”

Half the charges against Field resulted from his actions in an appeal filed by Damon Auguste, one of two men Field prosecuted in 1998 for sexual assault on a 15-year-old girl. Auguste was sentenced to prison for 18 years, eight months but later filed a habeas petition based on a claim that Field did not disclose exculpatory evidence.

Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Emerson overturned the conviction in 2004 based on prosecutorial misconduct; he said Field did not disclose DNA lab notes and new evidence indicated false testimony affected the outcome of the case. Auguste was freed and the charges were reduced to a misdemeanor.

With his petition, Auguste filed a declaration by Stephen Smith, a boyfriend of the victim, whom Smith claimed had fabricated the rape because she stayed out past curfew and feared she’d be caught by her parents.

Although prosecutors are prohibited from obtaining search warrants to defend against habeas proceedings, Field — in an effort to locate Smith — obtained six search warrants and had three sealed. Emerson testified in the bar court that he had ordered Field, during a meeting in his chambers, not to obtain any search warrants without his permission. Field did not apply to Emerson for any of the warrants.

He located and interviewed Smith, who confirmed that the victim had fabricated her allegations of sexual assault. Despite Field’s obligation to disclose that information, the bar charges that he committed acts of moral turpitude by withholding the information from Auguste. He also gave the court the impression that he had not located Smith, the bar charges.

Also testifying early in the trial was Sandra Coke, an investigator for the defense, who said that she lost touch with Smith after initially interviewing him in 2002. She said she spent months in a fruitless search for Smith in 2003 and was surprised to learn Field had already interviewed him. Field’s attorney, Allen Ruby, suggested that Coke and Auguste’s attorney knew Smith’s whereabouts at the time of a key hearing.

But the judge found that it was “grossly unfair, excessive and unbalanced” to use a search warrant to rebut evidence in a post-conviction proceeding after the conviction was final and excluded all evidence obtained as a result of the search warrants.

The third matter drawing bar charges was a 1995 rape case in which Field prosecuted a minor who claimed to be 13. Field believed he was older; if that were the case, the boy could be tried as an adult. Although the youth’s age could be accurately ascertained through a dental exam, Judge Socrates “Pete” Manoukian denied Field’s oral request and instructed him to file papers to seek an order.

Instead, Field had the probation department arrange for the exam, which showed the defendant was between 16 and 19 1/2 years old. Field did not notify Manoukian or the boy’s attorney that the dental exam had been performed and it was suppressed. The case ultimately was dismissed.

The bar also alleges that during the prosecution of a murder case in 2003, Field withheld evidence from the defense that cast doubt on the credibility of several key witnesses. In addition, he added an enhancement of 25 years to life for one of the defendants, knowing the enhancement was based on one witness’ impeachable testimony.

The court struck the enhancement charge and concluded that Field’s discovery violation was “blatant” and that he failed to properly disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense.

Field, who several years ago expressed interest in either an appointment to the bench or a run for the top spot in his office, has attracted support from colleagues and friends, many of whom have attended the trial. Kevin Smith, president of the Santa Clara County Government Attorneys Association, said “the biggest shock to all of us has been the notion that there’s no statute of limitations” on when the bar can charge lawyer misconduct. “The system that we work in in criminal justice has standards and rules that apply to every defendant . . . We wouldn’t get away with prosecuting someone for something they did 13 years ago.”}

He was convicted of prosecutory misconduct by the California Bar Court

[url]http://members.calbar.ca.gov/courtDocs/05-O-00815.docx[/url]

My prosecution took place during the Spring/Summer of 2009. The District Attorneys office had an obligation to either notify me of this issue or put Ben Field on administrative leave and prohibit him from practicing as a prosecutor until the Ca Bar issue was completely settled.

The Attorney's office has already settled with one defendent for his misconduct, and I am now suing for Malicious Prosecution, where since Ben Field provided deceptive legal briefs to the Santa Clara Appelate Court, and the court ruled against the District Attorney and in my favor based on insufficient evidence for the allegation, this is really a no brainer.

What do you people think about this matter?

[Antigone*of*Greece]

Responders, please check this poster's history.

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by GoldySJSU

My prosecution took place during the Spring/Summer of 2009. The District Attorneys office had an obligation to either notify me of this issue or put Ben Field on administrative leave and prohibit him from practicing as a prosecutor until the Ca Bar issue was completely settled.

Please cite the statutory or case law for this claim.

Also, how does this effect your matter? Weren't you prosecuted in traffic court for blue lights???

- Carl

[GoldySJSU]

Hello

The case number of the Ca Bar Court is: 05-O-00815-PEM (06-O-11153;
06-O-12173); 06-O-12344 (Cons.)

The relationship to my case is that he did not comply with the following rulings based on filing deceptive legal brief to the Santa Clara County Appellate Court to attempt to prevent my appeal of my problem to be heard at that Court. He provided false information or deceptive information to the court, that I systemically and with detail illustrated the error in his statements. His statements where purposely written to obfuscate and deceive the court. I obviously was correct because the Santa Clara County Appellate Court heard my case and in fact ruled in my favor based on unsubstantiated allegations. This contributes to the legal liability of malicious prosecution by the Santa Clara District Attorney. The Attorney’s office clearly should have put him on administrative leave until all proceedings in the Ca Bar Court were concluded to maintain the integrity of the District Attorney’s functioning. As an officer of the court, you swear to be truthful in all ways to the court. First let’s look at the Ben Field's Ca Bar Court Decision regarding Discipline:

VI. Recommended Discipline

Accordingly, the court hereby recommends that respondent Benjamin T. Field, be suspended from the practice of law for five years, that execution of that suspension be stayed, and that respondent be placed on probation for five years, with the following conditions:

1. Respondent must be actually suspended from the practice of law for the first four years of probation and until he shows proof satisfactory to the State Bar Court of his rehabilitation, present fitness to practice, and present learning and ability in the general law, pursuant to standard 1.4(c)(ii) of the Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct;

2. During the period of probation, respondent must comply with the State Bar Act and the Rules of Professional Conduct;

3. Respondent must submit written quarterly reports to the Office of Probation on each January 10, April 10, July 10, and October 10 of the period of probation. Under penalty of perjury, respondent must state whether respondent has complied with the State Bar Act, the Rules of Professional Conduct, and all conditions of probation during the preceding calendar quarter. If the first report will cover less than thirty (30) days, that report must be submitted on the next following quarter date, and cover the extended period.
In addition to all quarterly reports, a final report, containing the same information, is due no earlier than twenty (20) days before the last day of the probation period and no later than the last day of the probation period;

4. Subject to the assertion of applicable privileges, respondent must answer fully, promptly, and truthfully, any inquiries of the Office of Probation, which are directed to respondent personally or in writing, relating to whether respondent is complying or has complied with the conditions contained herein;

5. Within ten (10) days of any change, respondent must report to the Membership Records Office of the State Bar, 180 Howard Street, San Francisco, California, 94105-1639, and to the Office of Probation, all changes of information, including current office address and telephone number, or if no office is maintained, the address to be used for State Bar purposes, as prescribed by section 6002.1;

6. Within one year of the effective date of the discipline herein, respondent must provide to the Office of Probation satisfactory proof of attendance at a session of the Ethics School, given periodically by the State Bar at either 180 Howard Street, San Francisco, California, 94105-1639, or 1149 South Hill Street, Los Angeles, California, 90015-2299, and passage of the test given at the end of that session. Arrangements to attend Ethics School must be made in advance by calling (213) 765-1287, and paying the required fee. This requirement is separate from any Minimum Continuing Legal Education Requirement (MCLE), and respondent will not receive MCLE credit for attending Ethics School. (Rules Proc. of State Bar, rule 3201);

7. The period of probation must commence on the effective date of the order of the Supreme Court imposing discipline in this matter; and

8. At the expiration of the period of this probation, if respondent has complied with all the terms of probation, the order of the Supreme Court suspending respondent from the practice of law for five years that is stayed, will be satisfied and that suspension will be terminated.

It is further recommended that respondent take and pass the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination (MPRE) administered by the National Conference of Bar Examiners, MPRE Application Department, P.O. Box 4001, Iowa City, Iowa, 52243, (telephone 319-337-1287) and provide proof of passage to the Office of Probation, within the period of his actual suspension. Failure to pass the MPRE within the specified time results in actual suspension by the Review Department, without further hearing, until passage. (But see Cal. Rules of Court, rule 951(b), and Rules Proc. of State Bar, rule 3201(a)(1) and (3).)

From what I know now, he has quit the District Attorney’s office and stopped practicing law. I suspect he is doing so temporarily to avoid having to comply with the Ca Bar Court conditions of probation. If he does not practice any law, the discipline cannot be enforced on him.

[FlyingRon]

Attention K-Mart Shoppers.

[GoldySJSU]

Article 1 of 7, Article ID: 1242864
Published on October 10, 2009, San Jose Mercury News (CA)
PROSECUTION TACTICS COST COUNTY

Disgraced prosecutor Ben Field left the Santa Clara County District Attorney's Office three months ago -- but his legacy lives on. On Friday, the county announced it will pay $750,000 to settle a lawsuit stemming from Field's questionable tactics in a criminal case. Woman to get $750,000 over invasive search, 'campaign of intimidation"


The lawsuit, filed by high-tech entrepreneur Donna Auguste, asserted that Field helped arrange an invasive

Complete Article, 665 words ( )

[GoldySJSU]

Article 4 of 7, Article ID: 1154010
Published on July 8, 2009, San Jose Mercury News (CA)
ATTORNEY RESIGNS FROM DA'S OFFICE

Months after a state bar judge recommended that Santa Clara County prosecutor Ben Field be suspended for four years for ethical misconduct, Field announced Tuesday he is leaving the District Attorney's Office to work for the South Bay AFL-CIO Labor Council and its nonprofit arm. Months after state sanction, he takes job at labor council


Field, 44, once a star prosecutor who harbored ambitions of becoming district attorney or a county judge, said Tuesday he has no intention of

Complete Article, 775 words ( )

[CdwJava]

I'm still trying to figure out how you get a malicious prosecution from a brief filed to the local superior court's appellate division.

If you have the money for an attorney, or if the county wants to settle with you to make you go away, that's their business. It sounds like your trying to dig for gold here and unless you can prove that he LIED or made stuff up, it just may not fly. But, the county may decide that paying you a couple thousand dollars is easier that fighting you in court, so you might get a free trip to Disneyland out of it.

- Carl

[Joshuaace2]

Can we get back to our regularly scheduled programming now?

[Antigone*of*Greece]

Originally Posted by Joshuaace2

Can we get back to our regularly scheduled programming now?

Josh,

How about some tekillya???

[GoldySJSU]

Thank you all for paying attention. Your feedback is very appreciated.

It is great to get another persons point of view. It is very difficult to create one from yourself.

I wish you all well, and prosperity.

[GoldySJSU]

I would argue that yes he has lied and witheld information from the court in his briefs.

I just feel if I tried to post it, it would be deleted, like many ones I have done in the past.

If you are interested, we could find a way to share info.

But great information from you none-the-less.

[Joshuaace2]

Originally Posted by Wirelessany1

Josh,

How about some tekillya???

It's been a long time, it would tekillme. It's actually Roger. Are you a certain individual who has been flirting with my buddy BE over yonder?

[Joshuaace2]

Alittle research leads me to believe you are**************..Howdy, I've seen you around.

[Antigone*of*Greece]

Originally Posted by Joshuaace2

It's been a long time, it would tekillme. It's actually Roger. Are you a certain individual who has been flirting with my buddy BE over yonder?

The one and only, sweetheart