(CN) — The Ninth Circuit heard arguments Thursday in a nine-year-old case seeking to expunge the conviction of the man accused of starting the 1970 Pioneer Hotel Fire in Tucson, Arizona.
Louis Taylor was sentenced to life in an Arizona state prison in 1972, two years after 29 people died in one of the most devastating fires in Tucson’s history. Taylor was arrested and charged with 28 counts of murder before a forensic investigation was even initiated to determine whether the fire was arson, according to the complaint Taylor filed in federal court in 2015. Though some witnesses said under oath they saw Taylor helping to extinguish the fire and carry victims to safety, an all-white jury convicted the then-16-year-old Black boy.
Taylor spent four decades behind bars until pleading no contest in 2013 in exchange for his freedom as part of a deal with Pima County prosecutors.
Taylor sued the county and the city of Tucson in 2015 for racial discrimination, wrongful arrest, prosecutorial misconduct, civil conspiracy and negligent investigation. In 2021, he amended his complaint to request that the 2013 plea and conviction be expunged as unconstitutional so that he can seek damages for the 42 years he spent in prison. He claims the case should have been dismissed then for lack of evidence, but he took the plea as the only way to escape prison.
Pima County asked U.S. District Judge Rosemary Marquez to dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, but Marquez refused, finding she has the power to expunge a state court criminal conviction if the jury comes to certain findings.
Two years later, the county asked the Ninth Circuit to issue a writ of mandamus, declaring that potential action outside of the trial judge’s power.
“Based on that clear error, we are going to trial based on a lawless remedy,” county attorney Nicholas Acedo told a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel Thursday morning in San Francisco.
U.S. Circuit Judge Richard Paez asked why the county requested mandamus now rather than wait until after the trial plays out.
“If there’s no basis for it, if it is an erroneous ruling, you can appeal that,” the Bill Clinton appointee told Acedo.
Acedo said allowing the case to proceed to trial poses an ethical issue that might disqualify him from representing the county. He will likely be called to testify, and the Arizona State Bar’s rules of ethics preclude one from acting as both a witness and an advocate in a trial. So he may be disqualified from representing Pima County.
The case has lasted nearly 10 years and includes more than 10,000 documents.
“Nobody could possibly step in at this moment and take over the case, and that’s the prejudice to my client,” Acedo said.
John Leader, representing Taylor, dismissed that argument entirely.
“The rules of ethics plainly allow him not to withdraw to avoid hardship with the client,” he told the panel. “The district court has not disqualified him, and we will not move to disqualify him.”
U.S. Circuit Judge Patrick Bumatay, a Donald Trump appointee, recommended Acedo receive an ethical opinion from the state bar on the matter.
Additionally, Acedo said waiting for the conclusion of trial to file a traditional appeal would run a time risk, as most witnesses are aging or already dead. The state’s expert witness on fire investigations died in 2023.
Leader argued that that’s the only appropriate remedy, as the situation isn’t drastic enough to call for a writ of mandamus at this juncture.
“The district court left the door open to appeal this,” he said. “The petitioners are free to do that.”
Leader argued that Judge Marquez’s order didn’t suggest an expungement of the conviction, but rather an expungement of the record, which is less legally gray in terms of feasibility. Though, he still insists that expungement of the conviction itself is lawful and necessary.
Bumatay disagreed, saying Marquez’s order clearly establishes her perceived authority to expunge a conviction. And he said there is no case law establishing such a precedent.
Leader countered that there’s never been a civil rights case brought under Section 1983 seeking to expunge a conviction, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t possible.
Acedo added at the end of his rebuttal that if the 2013 plea and conviction are overturned, it’s possible for the original 1972 conviction to come back in play, which theoretically would put Taylor back behind bars.
U.S. Circuit Judge Jacqueline Nguyen, a Barack Obama appointee, seemed to agree with him.
The case is set to go to trial on April 22 and could last anywhere from three to eight weeks, the attorneys say. While a jury could find the original 1972 conviction unconstitutional, it’s unclear what it’s status would be if the 2013 conviction is expunged.
Follow @JournalistJoeAZ
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
Additional Reads
-
California certifies March 5 primary election results April 12, 2024 -
-
Hunter Biden appeals April 12, 2024 -
