Court of Appeal rolls back conviction against a man for murdering his father, based on ineffective legal counsel, including a courthouse affair.

Before jurors convicted Joseph Sampognaro Jr. of first-degree murder of his father, Joseph Sampognaro Sr., they heard a lot of testimony. Prosecutors painted a picture of a strained relationship between the men and a motley crew of friends, girlfriends and acquaintances, several of whom, at the time of the shooting in 2020, were living in a barn off Laureles Grade. There was drug use, there was betrayal, there were jail stays.

One man, Sage, who had lived in the barn, described watching Sampognaro’s transformation after he was released from jail less than a month before the shooting. He wanted to get sober, then overdosed and became even more paranoid than before. “The devil was in his eyes,” Sage said.

While his attorneys had argued successfully before the trial to exclude evidence related to Sampognaro’s character, this testimony and much more was introduced. The fact that his lawyers from the Monterey County Public Defender’s Office, Thomas O’Keefe and Rachel Miller, did not object to it, forms the basis of a Nov. 5 decision by the Sixth District Court of Appeal vacating the 2021 murder conviction due to ineffective counsel.

“A reasonably competent attorney, having already secured exclusion of character evidence, would object to the characterization of [Sampognaro] as a violent person who should not have been released from custody,” Judge Adrienne Grover wrote.

Further complicating the case was the argument that Sampognaro’s counsel was conflicted. Miller, one of his two attorneys, had a brief sexual affair with the bailiff during the trial. The bailiff is an employee of the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office – the same agency that investigated the case.

“We conclude the relationship created a potential conflict of interest necessitating disclosure, which would not require reversal on its own but contributes to our lack of confidence in the verdict,” Grover wrote in the appellate decision.

After the affair came to light, Sampognaro sought a new trial, but a Monterey County Superior Court judge denied that motion in 2022.

The appellate decision is not yet final; prosecutors have two months to appeal to the Supreme Court or ask the Court of Appeal to reconsider. If the judgment is finalized, it will return to the county level, where Chief Assistant District Attorney Berkley Brannon says they will again prosecute the murder case.

Sampognaro is serving a sentence of 25 years to life for the murder charge, plus 14 years for other counts. (Two counts related to leading deputies on a reckless, high-speed chase, were not overturned.)

“Instead of the jury focusing on the evidence, it’s tempting to think, ‘Well the guy’s just a cold, violent person,’” says Jonathan Grossman, executive director of the Sixth District Appellate Program, who represented Sampognaro.

Grossman also notes questions about the evidence: Some witnesses reported memory lapses due to drug use, and accounts contradicted each other. A gun was never located.