DA pushes ‘victims’ rights bill,’ defense lawyers call it ‘piece of trash’

Clark County District Attorney Steve Wolfson, along with other top prosecutors across Nevada, wants a law enacted that would thoroughly alter the criminal process in the state.

He recently told lawmakers in Carson City that the proposed changes could save the state money, help battle crime and assist victims and “protect Nevada tourist destinations,” while bringing the state’s court system in line with others across the country.

If enacted, the law would allow prosecutors to present hearsay at a preliminary hearing or to a grand jury, meaning victims would not have to testify or be subject to cross examination. Instead, a police officer could read a report or victim’s statement into the record, and a justice of the peace could decide probable cause “based solely on hearsay evidence.”

Wolfson called the proposal “a victims’ rights bill.”

“It’s for that 15-year-old girl that has to testify down in juvenile court in a child abuse case,” Wolfson said. “Then she has to talk to detectives, then she has to testify at a preliminary hearing, then at trial.”

Hearsay evidence is allowed in 36 other states, including every state that borders Nevada, and preliminary hearings are almost never used in the federal court system.

“We’re in the minority compared with the rest of the country,” Wolfson said. Good prosecutors should always look for best practices.”

He also said a change in the law could save hundreds of thousands of dollars, in part from the cost of having to repeatedly bring out-of-state witnesses back to Las Vegas.

But several high-profile defense lawyers in Las Vegas oppose the legislation, saying the proposal all but eliminates the already low threshold for a judge to determine whether a jury should hear evidence.

Tom Pitaro, a criminal defense attorney who has practiced law in Nevada since 1974, called the bill “a piece of trash” that “has sent shock waves through the criminal justice system.” He said it would unravel a process that has been part of state law since Nevada joined the Union in 1864.

Victim advocates favor the bill because it means witnesses and victims would spend less time in court recounting crimes against them.

“I have personally witnessed the trauma, fear and revictimization that victims, especially child victims face when testifying at preliminary hearings,” Jocelyn Murphy of The Rape Crisis Center wrote in a letter to the Committee on Judiciary, which is scheduled to decide whether to approve the bill today. “Court proceedings can be extremely difficult and emotional.

The bill offers “a kinder approach to victims,” she added.

Lisa Lynn Chapman, director of community relations at Safe Nest, a shelter for victims of domestic violence, said that felony domestic violence cases are particularly egregious and victims sometimes still live with or have feelings for their attacker.

“If you’re in the same room that somebody who’s tried to strangle you, there still can be a lot of fear,” Chapman said. Under the proposed changes, “they’re not having to relive what’s going on again and again and again and again.”

Bill Terry, a criminal defense attorney who testified before the Legislature, pointed out that victims would have to testify at a trial, and more cases may go to trial if the changes are enacted.

“The presumption is that everybody is guilty,” Terry told the Review-Journal. “And that’s a bad presumption.”

Deputy Public Defender Scott Coffee, who also testified, said preliminary hearings can often be less confrontational for victims than testimony at trial.

He compared preliminary hearings to movie trailers.

“Without seeing the trailer, you’re going to watch a lot of bad movies,” he said.

Of the roughly 23,000 felony cases prosecutors filed in 2014, about 160 went to trial. Defense lawyers said many of the cases were resolved at a preliminary hearing.

Steve Yeager, with the Clark County public defender’s office, wrote to lawmakers in opposition to the bill.

Yeager said that the preliminary hearing has been a part of the Nevada legal system since the late 19th century. The legislation “has the potential to render preliminary hearings a farce,” Yeager wrote, “because the admission of hearsay testimony does not allow the case to be vetted and it is difficult to imagine that a Justice of the Peace would ever dismiss a preliminary hearing.”

Dominic Gentile, another defense lawyer who testified before the Legislature, said Nevada is progressive when it comes to offering testimony from witnesses and victims at preliminary hearings. Allowing for unlimited hearsay could stall negotiations, he added.