Conflict motion filed in Grossman case following Teran charges

The fallout from the criminal case against Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Diana Teran continues, with the DA's office filing a motion providing notice of a potential conflict of interest linked to its high-profile case against convicted murderer Rebecca Grossman and Teran's attorney.

District Attorney George Gascón's office filed the motion in the Los Angeles County Superior Court Thursday, noting that Teran's lawyer, James W. Spertus had been appointed to Grossman's team earlier this year, and stating that they believe a waiver from Grossman may be necessary.

A jury found Grossman guilty of two counts of murder in February for killing young brothers, Mark and Jacob Iskander, when she struck them on a crosswalk with her speeding vehicle in Westlake Village in 2020. Sentencing in the case, which was widely covered in the media, is scheduled for June. Spertus, who was appointed to Grossman's team after the conviction, is understood to be working on a motion for a new trial. The People of the State of California v. Rebecca Grossman, LA093990 (L.A. Super. filed December 30, 2020)

Teran was charged with 11 felonies Wednesday, relating to alleged misuse of government data, in a case brought by California Attorney General Rob Bonta. The charges date back to 2018 when she was a Constitutional Policing Advisor at the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and is alleged to have accessed what Bonta described as "numerous confidential peace officer files." She is accused of then "impermissibly" using that data at the DA's office in 2021.

A felony complaint for arrest warrant filed in L.A. County Superior Court shows that the confidential records involve 11 unnamed sheriff's deputies. Spertus has dismissed the charges as erroneous. People of the State of California v. Diana Maria Teran 24CJCF02649 (L.A. Super. Ct. filed April 24, 2024)

The conflict motion notes that at the time of charges being filed against her, Teran was "the ADA in the chain of command for the lawyers assigned to prosecute this case."

The motion goes on to state: "Ms. Teran's attorney, who is representing her in the case filed by the Attorney General's Office, is James Spertus. Mr. Spertus became an attorney of record for defendant Grossman on March 22, 2024. Since Mr. Spertus represents both Ms. Teran and defendant Grossman, there exists a potential conflict of interest."

The motion, addressed to Judge Joseph A. Brandolino - who is overseeing Grossman's trial - requests that the court address the issue of the waiver "before Mr. Spertus has taken any action on this case," referencing the Grossman proceedings. It requests that the court address the motion "expeditiously" to reduce the chances of potential conflicts delaying the Grossman proceedings, including sentencing and the motion for a new trial.

Responding to questions Friday, the DA's office said that the Grossman case was the only potential conflict it was currently aware of in relation to Teran and Spertus. In response to a question over what would happen if the conflict were not resolved, a spokesperson for the office wrote "we won't speculate on the Court's decision in this matter."

Speaking by telephone Friday, Spertus said that he did not object to the court hearing the motion but rejected its merits.

"There's no conflict," he said. "In representing Ms. Grossman I am technically adverse to the People of the State of California, in representing Ms. Teran I am also adverse to the People of California."

He said that the DA's decision to file the motion was not unusual, given its previous actions in the case.

"The DA's office has raced to the court for process rulings several times before I joined the case and this is a continuation of the behavior," he said.

Spertus has previously told the Daily Journal that he expects the charges against Teran to be dismissed as soon as they are heard in court.

"The charges are defective on their face and will be dismissed as soon as a court reviews them. Every document underlying the charges was a public record taken either from court files or made public by California Senate Bill 1421," Spertus wrote in an email Thursday.

"Regardless, Ms. Teran's official duties at the DA's office was to oversee the DA's internal database of officer misconduct findings to ensure compliance with the DA's constitutional obligations under Brady, and a person cannot be charged with a crime for fulfilling an official duty," he added.