The Buck Stops With The District Attorney, Not The State Of California.

A man who spent 24 years in prison after being convicted of murder because of the perjured testimony of a jailhouse informant, filed an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office failed to create any system for deputy D.A.’s handling criminal cases to access information pertaining to the benefits provided to jailhouse informants. He further contended the office was on notice that jailhouse informants were falsely testifying. The district court granted a judgment on the pleadings in favor of the D.A.’s office because the district attorney acts on behalf of the state rather than the county in setting policy related to jailhouse informants. The Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded, stating: “[W]e conclude that California district attorneys act as local policymakers when adopting and implementing internal policies and procedures related to the use of jailhouse informants.” Goldstein v. City of Long Beach and County of Los Angeles (Ninth Cir.; May 8, 2013) (Case No. 10-56787).