Riverside County: Grand jury wants county counsel kept out of probe

Riverside County’s civil grand jury is appealing a judge’s ruling allowing the county’s legal team to be present when jurors hear from witnesses, saying the decision poses problems for a probe of the Office of County Counsel.

The appeal of a Superior Court judge’s ruling is the latest volley in an ongoing legal dispute between the grand jury and County Counsel Greg Priamos, who maintains he’s doing his job as county government’s top lawyer.

Grand juries are panels of 19 citizens that are sworn in by a judge every year. Civil grand juries look at the inner workings of public agencies and suggest improvements.

In a brief filed in late July with the Fourth District Court of Appeal, lawyers for the grand jury contend Judge John W. Vineyard erred when he ruled there was no basis to disqualify county counsel from grand jury proceedings and that the office could represent county employees who testify before the grand jury.

The grand jury was investigating county counsel, and having lawyers from that office present during testimony presents a conflict of interest, attorneys Michael Belter and Jay Ritt wrote in their petition to the court.

“It is axiomatic that the target of a grand jury’s investigation has no right to be present in the grand jury proceedings,” they wrote. They later added: “It is inherently incompatible to simultaneously represent witnesses inside a grand jury proceeding and be the subject of the grand jury’s inquiry.”

The California Penal Code prohibits county counsel from attending grand jury hearings without the grand jury’s invitation, the petition read.

A recently added section allows witnesses to have a lawyer present. But the grand jury argues that doesn’t mean they can have any lawyer, including County Counsel.

The grand jury wants the appellate court to require an order barring county counsel “from representing any witness called to testify before the Grand Jury concerning its investigation of the County Counsel’s Office,” the petition read.

Priamos was unavailable for comment. But county spokesman Ray Smith said a letter Priamos sent to the grand jury in January made it clear “that as a general matter, the law properly grants a county witness the right to have County Counsel present during an interview with the grand jury if the witness so desires where the jury is reviewing a county department.”

Priamos and the grand jury have locked horns going back to his time as the city of Riverside’s top attorney. Back then, the grand jury accused Priamos of compromising its secrecy concerning a probe of police practices, a charge Priamos denied.

In earlier reports, the grand jury accused Priamos of hindering its investigations by denying information and running interference on county departments’ behalf. Priamos said the grand jury misunderstood its role and the county isn’t obligated to turn over non-public records.

Before disbanding at the end of June, the last grand jury issued a report taking the county to task for the process used to hire Priamos and suggested a new search for a county counsel. The report suggested Priamos’s hiring was retaliation for a report critical of how county supervisors distribute money from a special community fund.

Supervisors have consistently praised Priamos’s performance since he was hired as county counsel last year.

August 12, 2015

Riverside Press-Enterprise

By Jeff Horseman