3-year suspension for coaching witness urged

A State Bar Court judge recommended a three-year suspension for a former Sonoma County deputy district attorney whose high-profile murder case was dismissed after evidence surfaced that he helped coach a prime witness.

In a ruling made public Thursday, Brooke Halsey Jr. was given five years' probation and a three-year suspension of his license to practice law in California. If he violates probation, his license could be suspended for another year.

The penalty must be affirmed by the state Supreme Court.

The judge found six of 10 charges of misconduct alleged by the State Bar to be true, primarily that Halsey illegally withheld evidence from defense attorneys, suppressed evidence and repeatedly lied to the trial court judge.

Halsey's discipline likely concludes years of criminal and civil legal proceedings sparked by the November 1999 death of Janet Pelfini.

Halsey, a Sonoma County prosecutor for 15 years, resigned while under suspension in 2005. His attorneys didn't return calls seeking comment on the Bar Court ruling.

Fallout from the Pelfini case also included the dismissal of the witness, a county pathologist, and perhaps the defeat of District Attorney Mike Mullins in the March 2002 election.

Pelfini's death initially was believed to be a suicide, but a grand jury later indicted her husband, Petaluma physician Louis Pelfini, for murder.

As the case moved toward trial, it was revealed that a key prosecu tion witness - the county pathologist who ruled the death a homicide - was being extensively coached to overcome credibility problems.

After the discovery of dozens hours of audio- and videotaped practice sessions with Dr. Thomas Gill, Halsey asked Judge Elliot Daum to dismiss the case in December 2001 , about two weeks after jurors began hearing testimony.

In her ruling, State Bar Court Judge Pat McElroy wrote that Halsey's "strong conviction that 'the husband did it' blinded his sense of duty as a prosecutor to promote justice and the ascertainment of truth."

Halsey "significantly harmed the public and the administration of justice by failing to uphold his duties as a prosecutor," in the Pelfini case and another incident in which he dismissed an acquaintance's misdemeanor Fish and Game violation, the judge wrote.

After the Pelfini case was dismissed, defense attorney Chris Andrian filed a complaint with the State Bar that resulted in a 21-day trial between October and March on charges that Halsey purposely withheld evidence from the defense and misled Daum repeatedly during trial preparation.

"The one I feel vindicated for is Dr. Pelfini," Andrian said. "So much has been said about how the guilty guy got off. I've never believed that. They tried to manufacture a case against him and this is what this was all about. They didn't want to put it all out there because they were worried they didn't have a case."

Halsey said at the Bar Court trial that he didn't purposely suppress evidence or mislead Daum.

Though he was an experienced prosecutor of abalone poaching and other cases, the Pelfini case was Halsey's first murder prosecution.

Halsey can ask for a reconsideration from McElroy or seek an appeal before a panel of State Bar Court judges.

If the penalty stands, Halsey would be required to abide by certain restrictions during his probation and take classes to show the Bar Court he has been rehabilitated. He could then seek to have his license reinstated.

The Bar Court also has the option of appealing, said supervising trial counsel Allen Blumenthal. He said his office was generally pleased with the ruling, but was still reviewing it.

State Bar prosecutors urged disbarment, while Halsey sought six months of stayed suspension. Last year, 58 California attorneys were disbarred and 261 were suspended, according to the Bar Court.

While the judge said Halsey's misconduct didn't rise to the level of disbarment, she appeared troubled by his insistence that he did no wrong.

Halsey "has not quite fully recognized his wrongdoing or its significant harm on the administration of justice and public confidence in the legal profession" and that he lacks the understanding "that it is his responsibility as a prosecutor to ensure that 'justice shall be done.'"