Calif. Bar Panel Upholds Ex-Prosecutor's Suspension Mike McKee 02-18-2010 A California State Bar Court appellate panel has upheld a four-year suspension for former Santa Clara County prosecutor Benjamin Field, despite an amicus curiae brief from the California District Attorneys Association warning of a chilling effect on prosecutions. The Bar review panel found it "inexcusable" and "disturbing" that Field, once a star in South Bay legal circles and considered a viable candidate for a judgeship, concealed evidence and ignored judges' orders over a 10-year period. The ruling, released late Friday, also affirmed five years of probation. "Although our system of administering justice is adversarial in nature, and prosecutors must be zealous advocates in prosecuting their cases, it cannot be at the cost of justice," Judge Catherine Purcell wrote in the 30-page opinion (pdf). "We find that Field lost sight of this goal when he prosecuted the four criminal cases examined here," she continued. "A narrow reading of his discovery obligations, coupled with the desire to convict, blurred his understanding of a prosecutor's special duty to promote justice and seek the truth." Presiding Judge Joann Remke and Judge Judith Epstein concurred. The ruling upheld the recommendations of State Bar Court Judge Patrice McElroy one year earlier (pdf). But it isn't final until the California Supreme Court takes action on the recommendations. Field, now chief of staff with Working Partnerships USA, a San Jose company that addresses the needs of working families in Silicon Valley, didn't return a phone call seeking comment. Neither did his attorney, Allen Ruby of San Jose. State Bar prosecutors went after Field, a practicing lawyer for more than 16 years, for what they deemed a pattern of misconduct in four criminal cases between 1995 and 2005. They accused him -- and the review panel agreed Friday -- of: • obtaining a dental exam of a minor accused of rape in violation of a court order. • concealing evidence favorable to the defense in a habeas corpus proceeding involving two men convicted of rape. • intentionally withholding a defendant's statement favorable to two co-defendants in a murder case. • making a closing argument in a sexually violent predator case in direct violation of a judge's order. During his State Bar Court trial, Field had maintained he thought he was adhering to court orders and acting within his authority as a prosecutor. The CDAA's amicus brief, while not taking an explicit position on Field's discipline, warned that several of the bases for discipline involved unsettled law. "Attorneys should be disciplined for conduct that violates clearly established law, or conduct so outrageous that its illegality is obvious," the amicus stated, "but should not be disciplined for conduct where the law is unsettled." W. Scott Thorpe, chief executive officer of CDAA, declined to comment Tuesday because he hadn't yet read the opinion. But the State Bar Court review panel dismissed all of Field's claims, pointing out, for example, that he tried unsuccessfully to conceal the testimony of one witness who could have cast serious doubt on the rape convictions of Damon Auguste and Kamani Hendricks. He had kept quiet on the location of a man who later testified that the 15-year-old rape victim had made up the allegations because she had missed curfew. "We note that Field's misconduct is particularly disturbing because it escalated over time," Judge Purcell wrote, finding Field instructed an investigator to prepare a misleading declaration, filed a statement implying he didn't know of the witness' location and urged Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Emerson to proceed with the habeas corpus proceedings without him. Calling that a "calculated scheme," Purcell held that Field's discovery violations were the "most serious." "When prosecutors act dishonestly or unilaterally decide that evidence favorable to the defense should be withheld," she wrote, "the accused is endangered, the case is damaged and public confidence is lost." Purcell explained that four years of suspension is the strongest punishment "short of disbarment." The UC-Berkeley School of Law graduate was saved that fate only because of three mitigating factors, the court held: "cooperation, good character and pro bono service." Field worked with the State Bar in the discipline case and has devoted much of his free time to charitable work for disadvantaged kids, crime victims and the homeless. He also had 36 character witnesses at trial, including some judges, community leaders and several attorneys, among them former Santa Clara County DA George Kennedy. State Bar prosecutors, through State Bar spokeswoman Diane Curtis, declined to comment. "Two State Bar courts have now spoken," she said, "and we have nothing to add at this point." The ruling is In the Matter of Field, 05-O-00815.

Police/Prosecutor Misconduct

Truth in Justice