Santa Clara County’s impacted courtrooms are starting to cause a problem in the perjury trial of Santa Clara City Council Member Anthony Becker. Lawyers for Becker were back in court on Tuesday, July 23 to try and resolve several motions to quash filed against 13 of the subpoenas issued by the defense.
Judge Benjamin Williams, who, to date, has not heard any arguments in the case, appeared frustrated by the fact that this hearing was a late addition to his calendar. At one point, he stated that it was tacked on to the 39 other line items on his afternoon docket.
Williams noted that hearing the motions in the case would take more than an hour, time he simply did not have for the day.
Ultimately, Judge Williams, Deputy District Attorney Jason Malinsky and Deputy Public Defender Chris Montoya all agreed to hold the hearing on another, less crowded day. The move forced many of the third-party attorneys who had filed motions to quash on subpoenas to rearrange their calendars once again.
This is the third hearing to try and deal with the issue of subpoenas. As Montoya pointed out to the judge, arguments were initially supposed to be heard on July 8; however, because the judge who had previously heard arguments in the case was not available, a county commissioner presided over that hearing.
Malinsky, representing the People, contested the use of a commissioner, which forced the hearing to be reassigned to a later date, July 15. At the July 15 hearing, the presiding judge pushed the hearing once again, this time to July 23.
Now, the items will be heard later this week.
Among the attorneys present was a representative for the telecommunications company First Communications Inc., a representative for Meta, the parent company of Facebook, a representative for Santa Clara Police Officers’ Association President Jeremy Schmidt, a representative from the County speaking on behalf of the Civil Grand Jury and a representative for the San Francisco Chronicle.
While most of the issues were not resolved, the judge did issue some small rulings and gave some indication of how he was leaning on others.
He said he was “mindful of the trial date,” which is supposed to begin on July 29.
Judge Williams said the Chronicle’s motion to quash “seemed founded” while Meta’s seemed “well founded.”
County Counsel argued that many of the items subpoenaed by the defense called for communications by the Civil Grand Jury with the City of Santa Clara, something that is protected under state law. The only way to release those communications would be by order from a presiding judge, something Judge Williams was not willing to rule on at that time.
Judge Williams also ruled on Montoya’s motion to unseal search warrants, which Malinsky did not oppose. However, Malinsky did state that while he was not opposed to unsealing the warrants, that was not a sign that he was conceding that the warrants were relevant to the case.
The judge granted the unsealing of the search warrants and affidavits.
Montoya argued that if the warrants were unsealed, then they were also entitled to the evidence gathered by those warrants.
Malinsky argued that the documents were not relevant to the case.
Ultimately, the judge reminded the People of their “lawful obligation” and told them to “produce or don’t produce at your own risk.” He ordered Malinsky to provide the search warrants and affidavits to the defense in 24 to 48 hours.
Malinsky asked that the judge rule on all motions to quash on which the defense had not filed paperwork.
The judge declined the request, saying that all will be dealt with at the hearing later in the week.
