Judge hears closing arguments in 'OC Snitch Scandal' 2.0

A judge will hear closing arguments Friday in a legal dispute over whether Orange County law enforcement has changed its ways in the wake of the so-called “jailhouse snitch scandal.”

Scott Sanders, the O.C. assistant public defender who, a decade ago, uncovered the widespread misuse of jailhouse informants by county law enforcement, now wants a San Diego Superior Court judge to drop charges in a decades-old murder case.

He’s arguing that the O.C. District Attorney's Office and Sheriff’s Department deliberately hid nearly two dozen pieces of evidence that could have been useful in defending against the murder charges, violating his clients’ right to a fair trial. Sanders also says some of the law enforcement witnesses he called during the months-long hearing — including Ebrahim Baytieh, a former O.C. prosecutor who’s now a Superior Court judge — testified “untruthfully.”

“Prosecution team members … have compellingly and consistently shown they cannot be trusted to meet their legal and ethical obligations,” Sanders wrote in a recent court filing.

In an earlier court filing, Sanders accused Baytieh of being at the center of an "enormous web of deception" designed to cover up misconduct that helped prosecutors win cases while cheating defendants out of their right to a fair trial. A spokesperson for Orange County Superior Court has said the court and judicial officers are prohibited by ethical rules from discussing active cases.

For its part, the district attorney’s office admits that evidence was withheld from the defense team, but says it wasn’t intentional. Even if it was, officials argue, the court already dealt out the proper punishment — the defendant's prior murder conviction was thrown out and a new trial was ordered.

What’s at stake

A decade ago, while defending Scott Dekraai, the man accused of killing eight people at a salon in Seal Beach, Sanders uncovered evidence that O.C. law enforcement had been frequently violating two fundamental rights of criminal defendants:

• The right to have a lawyer present while being questioned by law enforcement, including by a confidential informant or “snitch” working for law enforcement. 
• The right to all evidence held by prosecutors — including evidence gathered by informants — that could help a defendant’s case.

Several courts and the federal Department of Justice agreed. As a result, criminal cases against nearly 60 defendants — including dozens charged with homicide — were tainted, leading to lessened or dropped charges.

"Either an innocent person was charged or a guilty person went free, neither of which we like as a society," Maurice Possley, senior researcher at the National Registry of Exonerations, told LAist last year.

In Dekraai’s case, a judge removed the entire O.C. District Attorney's Office from prosecuting the case and ruled that Dekraai couldn't be sentenced to death because of misconduct involving jailhouse snitches.

The O.C. District Attorney’s Office implemented reforms, including firing Baytieh. Soon after, Baytieh won a seat on the O.C. Superior Court — with a rating of “Exceptionally Well Qualified” from the local bar association.

Why this case matters

The judge’s ruling in the current case on whether prosecutors’ misconduct was so egregious as to warrant dropping murder charges could have major implications for the O.C. justice system.

Sanders has identified dozens of other cases he said could be reopened because their prosecution involved the same methods and actors.

Plus, the case raises questions about whether authorities have implemented sufficient reforms to correct the problems uncovered in the initial snitch scandal. It's not illegal for authorities to use confidential informants — in or out of custody — to collect information. But once someone has been charged with a crime, the 6th Amendment and subsequent court decisions guarantee them the right to have a lawyer present during questioning by authorities, including an informant secretly working for law enforcement. This is sometimes called the "Massiah" rule after a Supreme Court case.

The murder case in question

Sanders is requesting that charges be dropped against Paul Gentile Smith, who is accused of stabbing Robert Haugen to death and setting his body on fire in Haugen's Sunset Beach apartment in 1988. Baytieh initially prosecuted the case against Smith, who was convicted of murder in 2010.

But in 2021, a judge threw out the conviction and ordered a new trial after sheriff's deputies refused to testify about their use of informants in the case.

Prosecutors have admitted they failed to turn over informant evidence that prosecutors are legally required to disclose to the defense. But they say they won’t use any tainted evidence to try to convict Smith.

“The victim’s family and society deserve justice and the Defendant can and will receive a fair retrial,” Seton Hunt, senior deputy district attorney, wrote in a Dec. 11 court filing.

The hearing on Sanders’ request to drop charges against Smith is taking place in San Diego rather than O.C. because of Judge Baytieh’s involvement in the case. Sanders hopes the judge will rule in the coming weeks.