A judge Friday denied a defense motion to dismiss a public corruption case against City Councilman Curren Price, who was ordered earlier this year to stand trial on allegations he misused public funds and failed to disclose financial interests.
Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Larry Paul Fidler, who oversaw Friday’s hearing, sided with county prosecutors, saying there was ample evidence — albeit circumstantial — to move the case forward. Fidler ordered Price and attorneys to return to court Oct. 16.
Price, 75, is charged with a dozen felony counts, including grand theft by embezzlement of public funds, conflict of interest and perjury.
The councilman’s attorneys, Michael V. Schafler and Alyssa D. Bell, wrote in their motion seeking dismissal of the case that Price is “a dedicated public servant who has represented Council District Nine with distinction for over a decade,” and that “none of those allegations has merit.”
“… Over the course of a six-day preliminary hearing, the district attorney failed to adduce any evidence whatsoever of Price’s criminal intent, a necessary element of each charge,” according to the defense attorneys.
In an opposition to the defense’s motion, Deputy District Attorney Casey Higgins wrote that there is “overwhelming proof that the defendant illegally received medical benefits, paid for with public moneys, based off an illegally obtained marriage; failed to disclose his conflict-of-interest on numerous votes he made; failed to properly recuse himself on numerous votes where he had a conflict of interest; and failed to properly report sources of income to his spouse, under penalty of perjury.”
Another judge, Shelly Torrealba, rejected a defense motion to dismiss the case in January following the six-day hearing, saying she found “sufficient cause” for it to proceed to trial.
During Friday’s hearing, Price’s lawyers challenged the district attorney’s arguments, insisting that there was little to no evidence supporting allegations of embezzlement, conflict of interest and perjury.
Prosecutors sought to show Price had created a process in which he could plausibly deny conflicts of interests or his failure to properly disclose financial ties to projects associated with his wife’s business. They alleged Price created a process in which the councilman would communicate with his staff via private messages or emails, and used a hard drive to share information related to his wife’s business.
Bell maintained Price did not willfully or knowingly fail to disclose financial ties associated with himself or his wife on key City Council or committee votes. She argued there was no conspiracy to hide or circumvent the law.
Bell further stated that prosecutors lacked evidence showing Price had organized such a process.
Price — who was elected in 2013 — will complete his third and final term in December and cannot run again for the post because he is termed-out. He has maintained his innocence.
If convicted as charged, he could face up to 11 years and four months in custody, including as much as nine years and four months in state prison and up to two years in county jail, according to the District Attorney’s Office.
After the preliminary hearing in January, Schafler told reporters outside court he believed the prosecution’s case has “a lot of gaps, a lot of holes,” and that the defense believes “Mr. Price will be vindicated and exonerated.”
In a statement released shortly after that hearing, Price’s representative said, “The testimony presented during the hearing, including from key witnesses, clearly shows that Councilman Price did not act with any intent to do wrong and that the case rests on speculation rather than facts.”
Angelina Valencia-Dumarot, executive director of communications for Price, said in the statement, “While the court’s ruling is disappointing, the council member remains fully committed to fighting these charges, clearing his name, and is confident the truth will ultimately prevail.”
In his own statement shortly after the hearing in January, District Attorney Nathan Hochman called the judge’s ruling “a significant step toward holding L.A. Council member Curren Price accountable for years of alleged corruption.”
“… The rules are clear: elected officials cannot enrich themselves at the expense of their constituents, cannot lie on disclosure forms, and cannot vote on matters in which they have a conflict of interest,” Hochman added.
Price pleaded not guilty to the initial 10 charges in December 2023, with two more charges filed against him last year.
The councilman is accused of failing to list money that a company solely owned by his current wife, Delbra Pettice Richardson, received as a subcontractor from some developers — along with the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority — which had pending matters before the City Council and failing to recuse himself from voting in favor of those projects. He allegedly failed to disclose information about the payments to Del Richardson & Associates on a form filed with the California Fair Political Practices Commission.
Price is also accused of embezzling nearly $33,800 in city funds from 2013 to 2017 to pay for medical benefits for Richardson, whom he allegedly falsely claimed was his wife, while still legally married to Lynn Suzette Price.
Price is the latest Los Angeles city official to fall into legal or political turmoil.
Former council members Jose Huizar and Mitch Englander both pleaded guilty to federal charges in recent years, while former Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas was convicted in 2023 of federal charges for trading votes during his time on the county Board of Supervisors in exchange for benefits provided by USC to his son.
Former City Council President Nury Martinez resigned in 2022 after being caught on tape making racist remarks in a conversation with two other council members and a county labor official, discussing the council’s redistricting process.