D.A. Files Misconduct Case Appeal

SANTA ANA — Even though the potential penalty--removal from office--is now moot, the Orange County district attorney’s office Monday asked the California Supreme Court to reinstate a bankruptcy-related misconduct charge against Supervisor Roger R. Stanton on his last official day in office.

Calling the Fourth District Court of Appeal’s recent dismissal of the charges a “quizzical decision” that would impede efforts to remove public officials at all levels of government for “significant categories of misconduct,” the district attorney asked the high court to reverse the ruling, and reinstate the charge against Stanton and Supervisor William G. Steiner.

The appellate panel unanimously dismissed the civil accusation for willful misconduct on Nov. 26, saying a district attorney should not be allowed to seek an official’s removal without evidence of corruption or a specific intent to break the law.

But this holding, the district attorney argued in a 25-page appeal, “contradicts virtually all established case law defining ‘misconduct in office.’ ”

Steiner, who becomes chairman of the Board of Supervisors this year, called the appeal “disappointing” and “an irritant” and added, “So much for starting the year on a positive note.”

Steiner noted the petition to the Supreme Court was prepared by Deputy Dist. Atty. E. Thomas Dunn, a close friend whom Steiner recently recommended to Gov. Pete Wilson for appointment as a Superior Court judge.

“I understand that Tom Dunn was forced to write this petition and I was stunned because of our close relationship. This is clearly a conflict of interest.”

Dunn could not be reached for comment Monday evening.

Allan H. Stokke, Steiner’s attorney, said the appeal “only confirms the wisdom of what the court of appeals said and that is that the district attorney should not be allowed to be a ‘super-governor.’ Here they are trying every way imaginable to support that idea that the district attorney can be king.”

Wylie Aitken, Stanton’s lawyer, called the appeal a waste of taxpayer money.

“This serves no useful purpose since it involves a remedy [removal from office] that will never be implemented. It is absolutely moot as far as Roger Stanton is concerned.”

Assistant Dist. Atty. Wallace J. Wade said Stanton’s name still appears on the petition because his and Steiner’s cases “are technically consolidated.”

“This issue of law we think is important enough to pursue,” Wade said.