Los Angeles County District Lawyer Nathan Hochman has escalated a rare authorized battle with a Superior Courtroom decide his workplace has accused of repeatedly undermining prosecutors by slashing expenses and handing down lighter sentences.
Hochman’s workplace has filed motions searching for to disqualify Decide Yvette Verastegui, who serves within the Clara Shortridge Foltz Prison Justice Middle in downtown Los Angeles, from listening to sure prison issues.
The problem stems from a sequence of instances wherein prosecutors allege Verastegui lowered expenses or imposed sentences far under these sought by the District Lawyer’s Workplace regardless of prosecutors arguing the info didn’t justify the reductions.
“When a decide goes forward and both reduces expenses or orders a way more lenient sentence that isn’t primarily based on the info and the legislation, we’ll vigorously oppose that,” Hochman instructed The Put up.
Among the many instances cited by prosecutors is a high-profile animal cruelty prosecution that attracted widespread consideration in 2025.
Joeboury Coleman and Shayla Alcala have been charged after movies circulated on-line allegedly displaying a seven-month-old pet being kicked and thrown down a multi-story stairwell.
In response to courtroom information, Verastegui accepted open pleas over prosecutors’ objections after the District Lawyer’s Workplace indicated it was ready to proceed to trial.
Coleman was sentenced to 2 years in state jail and acquired 397 days of credit score for time served.
Alcala had two felony counts lowered to misdemeanors and was sentenced to 1 12 months of abstract probation, together with counseling and academic applications.
Prosecutors argue the pet case was not an remoted incident.
One other instance cited by the District Lawyer’s Workplace concerned the infamous Oceanwide Plaza towers, the graffiti-covered downtown Los Angeles skyscrapers that turned a nationwide image of city blight after taggers scaled the unfinished high-rises and coated dozens of tales with graffiti.
In February 2024, authorities arrested a person accused of rappelling down one of many towers whereas spray-painting the tag “SAUT” throughout a number of flooring.
In response to courtroom information, prosecutors alleged the vandalism brought on greater than $70,000 in injury and provided a plea deal requiring the defendant to plead responsible to a felony, full graffiti-removal work and pay restitution earlier than probably incomes a discount to a misdemeanor.
The defendant rejected the provide, courtroom information present.
Verastegui later indicated she would scale back the case to misdemeanors and impose probation, neighborhood service and restitution over prosecutors’ objections, based on courtroom filings.
A 3rd case concerned Giovanni Garcia, who was dealing with felony expenses and had three prior critical felony convictions, generally often called strikes.
Courtroom information present prosecutors argued Garcia’s prison historical past warranted a considerably longer jail sentence than the one in the end contemplated by the courtroom.
Verastegui dismissed the prior convictions and successfully resolved the case earlier than it had been assigned to a trial decide, courtroom information present.
For Hochman, the dispute extends far past any particular person defendant.
“If we give a proposal and a defendant doesn’t wish to settle for the provide, that’s definitely their proper,” Hochman stated.
“However when a decide, with out the total overview of all of the info and the legislation, decides a way more lenient sentence or set of expenses is acceptable with out conducting a full listening to, and as importantly, with out listening to from the victims of the crime, then we consider that decide is performing inappropriately.”
In at the very least one case, prosecutors requested the California Courtroom of Attraction to intervene and prevailed.
“Our aim is to make sure that victims obtain the total measure of justice primarily based on the info and legislation of each case,” Hochman stated.
In response to Hochman, the division the place Verastegui serves has historically performed a largely administrative position, assigning trial-ready instances to accessible courtrooms reasonably than resolving disputed prison issues.
“Virtually by no means do they transcend the ministerial position of simply assigning the instances out,” Hochman stated.
“We aren’t going to let her unilaterally give you resolutions that we consider fully undersell a case and do extra injury to victims.”
Hochman argued that lowering expenses in critical prison instances can undermine deterrence and erode public confidence within the justice system.
“One other necessary facet of any prosecution is the message it sends to others pondering of partaking in comparable crimes, that they are going to be held accountable and the implications can be important,” he stated.
“When a decide countermands that message with out basing her order on a full grounding of the info and the legislation, it does a disservice to the whole prison justice system.”
The District Lawyer’s Workplace maintains it’s not difficult a decide’s authority to disagree with prosecutors after conducting a full overview of the info and authorized file.
Fairly, Hochman argues the division the place Verastegui sits was by no means supposed to operate as a venue for resolving contested prison instances earlier than they’re assigned to trial courts.
“We’ll respect a decide’s resolution after they’ve put within the work and reviewed the file,” Hochman stated.
“What we’re objecting to is when that course of isn’t occurring and defendants are receiving considerably lowered outcomes over the objections of prosecutors and victims.”
Decide Verastegui and the Los Angeles Superior Courtroom didn’t instantly reply to requests for remark.
