DEFENSE LAWYER QUITS LAB CASE; QUESTIONS ARISE AS TO COUNSEL SHARING INFORMATION WITH PROSECUTORS.

Byline: Jesse Hiestand Daily News Staff Writer

A hearing stemming from the challenge of more than 600 drunk driving cases ground to a halt Friday and a key defense attorney withdrew from the case after the bombshell accusation that he may have shared confidential information with prosecutors.

Ventura County Superior Court Judge Steven Z. Perren postponed resumption of the hearing until next Friday, when he scheduled a closed-door session to determine whether a conversation between defense attorney Kevin DeNoce and a prosecutor's investigator represents a ``tempest in a teapot or a hurricane at sea.''

``The underpinning of this is the public's trust in what we do, and I'm not going to threaten that,'' Perren said. ``I have to find out what was communicated and where do I go from there.''

A somber defense team presented Perren with a memo, dated Monday, written by Investigator Michael McKendry, who said he had talked recently with DeNoce - himself a former prosecutor who headed up the district attorney's DUI unit.

``DeNoce shared with McKendry unspecified information he had shared with `other members of the defense team in this case,' '' said a summary of McKendry's memo filed in court.

In a phone conversation held before Perren imposed a gag order in the case, DeNoce denied sharing any potentially damaging information with prosecutors.

``I can't believe that's being suggested - it's ludicrous,'' he said.

But defense attorneys said they fear DeNoce may have shared their strategy with prosecutors, thus jeopardizing their attempt to get more than 600 DUI cases dismissed on grounds that the Ventura County Sheriff's Department crime lab conducted sloppy or unlicensed alcohol testing this spring.

``Whether it's true or not, you have to assume the worst - that the defense has been compromised and the prosecution has inside information,'' Ventura defense attorney Ron Jackson said outside court. ``This is the most incredible can of worms I've seen in 30 years.''

Recognizing the possible harm this information could do, Perren got a copy of the McKendry memo from prosecutors and ordered it sealed.

During an emotional afternoon court session, DeNoce withdrew from the litigation challenging DUI cases. His 11 clients also were ordered to appear at the hearing next Friday so the judge can determine whether they want another attorney and want to continue challenging the case against them.

Several of the defense attorneys formerly teamed with DeNoce expressed dismay at the accusations against him.

``We have some pretty serious legal and ethical obligations to deal with here,'' Deputy Public Defender Jean Farley told Perren.

Farley and other attorneys also said they will have to contact each of the 620-or-so defendants in the action and see whether they want to proceed in light of the accusations against DeNoce.

``I have talked to Mr. DeNoce about my client's case,'' Jackson said in court. ``I did so in the understanding that it was in the strictest confidence.''

But DeNoce said his conversation with McKendry had nothing to do with specific cases. Instead, he related a conversation he had in May with Deputy District Attorney John Cardoza, a friend and former co-worker who oversees misdemeanor cases, including DUIs.

DeNoce said he had learned in May that the crime lab was conducting alcohol breath tests, although it had lost its state license to do so, and wanted to know whether Cardoza was aware of the situation.

``I went to Cardoza and asked him if they were still doing the breath program,'' DeNoce recalled. ``Cardoza said he knew nothing about the crime lab's problems.''

But defense attorneys contend that prosecutors knew about and possibly concealed the lab's testing problems and thus have a conflict of interest that merits their recusal from these cases. This issue was the subject of a hearing that began Monday.

Perren said what worries him most was a comment DeNoce made during to McKendry that may have been ``anecdotal, off-hand or meaningless.'' While the comment was not disclosed, DeNoce might have revealed that the defense team knew Cardoza was unaware of the lab's problems.

Amid deep sighs and long thought, the judge said even assuming the worst - that DeNoce breached his ethical duty.

``This has got to be a real difficult position for the judge to be placed in,'' defense attorney Jackson said outside court.

``He's got to protect the integrity of the system yet he may not want to go through a wholesale dismissal of cases involving people who may in fact be guilty.''