A new motion filed Friday in the controversial case that has roiled Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner’s office argued that a federal judge should not overturn a man’s murder conviction.
The filing from the District Attorney’s Office — which would have to be accepted by U.S. District Judge Paul S. Diamond — was the latest development in a legal fight that has focused primarily on the conduct of lawyers in the case.
Jean Peters-Baker and Thomas Gaeta wrote in their motion that Dennis Johnson, who was found guilty of second-degree murder in 2009 and sentenced to life in prison without parole, should not be provided relief on his multiple appellate claims. The prosecutors also argued that Johnson had not yet exhausted his remedies in state court.
Peters-Baker, a longtime prosecutor from Missouri who previously led the prosecutor’s office in the county that includes Kansas City, was hired by Krasner’s office to handle the case as an outside attorney. Gaeta is Krasner’s civil litigation supervisor.
On Tuesday, the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office said in court documents that Krasner should be barred from continuing to oversee the post-conviction case in federal court — and that his office should be kicked off the case as well.
Prosecutors for Pennsylvania Attorney General Dave Sunday argued that drama about the Johnson case has consumed the District Attorney’s Office, and that Krasner has “placed his personal interest in protecting the office above the Commonwealth’s interest.”
Krasner’s office said the DA had acted in legally appropriate ways, and that his office should be allowed to continue overseeing the case.
Krasner’s own staffers have accused him of questionable conduct in the case, including by saying he told them to “protect the office” and that they could face “consequences” if they didn’t.
In a Tuesday filing, Gaeta wrote that Krasner had taken pains to ensure the case was handled “with competence and integrity.”
Diamond has sought to learn more about how various attorneys connected to the case have behaved while the matter has moved through federal court.
The case began as a routine appeal, but in recent months has led to a series of explosive accusations about the inner workings of the District Attorney’s Office.
Several prosecutors said they advised Krasner to refer the case to the Attorney General’s Office, and Krasner allegedly responded angrily or suggested tactics they thought were legally inappropriate.
The tactics allegedly included keeping the case in-house, potentially seeking to assign blame to a line prosecutor while protecting her supervisor, and taking steps to “protect the office” in court.
At one point, Diamond suggested he viewed the allegations as potentially criminal, saying if they were true, they could amount to perjury, conspiracy, or obstruction of justice.
The judge did not specify who he believed might be at fault.