When the Court Violates Its Own Orders: A Deep Dive into the October 2nd, 2023 Ruling

When the Court Violates Its Own Orders: A Deep Dive into the October 2nd, 2023 Ruling

By ThaWilsonBlock Magazine

Published on: thawilsonblock.com

Series: From the Inside: Exposing Public Corruption in Los Angeles County

What Happens When the Judge Becomes the Lawbreaker?

In the American justice system, judicial orders carry the weight of law. But what happens when a court violates its own order? What happens when the very body entrusted to uphold constitutional protections disregards its own authority—especially when that violation leads to an unlawful deprivation of liberty?

This installment of our exposé focuses on a critical, sealed order issued on October 2nd, 2023, by then-Pasadena-based Judge Suzette Louise Clover of the Los Angeles County Superior Court. The order was clear, legally binding, and procedurally narrow. Yet the consequences of ignoring it became the basis for a chain reaction of due process violations that now implicate multiple judicial actors, public defenders, and forensic professionals in what amounts to fraud upon the court.

The Sealed Court Order: A Specific Purpose and Narrow Scope

On October 2, 2023, Judge Clover signed an Order for Appointment of Psychiatrist/Psychologist under seal. The order explicitly authorized Dr. Pietro D’Ingillo, Psy.D., to act as a confidential expert for the defense only under California Evidence Code §§ 730, 952, and Penal Code § 1001.36. The purpose: to assess the defendant’s eligibility for mental health diversion, a rehabilitative process that allows treatment in lieu of punishment.

The order did not authorize a Penal Code § 1368 or § 730 competency assessment for the court. It did not waive confidentiality. And it did not permit the evaluation to be shared with or used by the prosecution or the court as a basis to suspend criminal proceedings.

What Happened Instead? A Legal 180

On February 14, 2024, Dr. D’Ingillo issued a competency report (PC § 730) addressed to Judge Clover, claiming the defendant was not competent to stand trial. The report contained a declaration of non-confidentiality and directly contradicted the scope and intention of the sealed order.

Worse, this report was publicly filed in Hollywood Mental Health Court on February 28, 2024, under the oversight of Judge Ronald Owen Kaye—not Judge Clover. The filing was facilitated by judicial assistant Mery Alaberkyan and overseen by then-appointed public defender Michael Salmaggi, both of whom attended Southwestern Law School, as did several other actors tied to this matter.

Violation of the Sealed Order: A Legal Breakdown

This shift from a defense-based, confidential PC § 1001.36 assessment to a court-ordered, non-confidential PC § 730 competency determination is not just a procedural irregularity—it's a violation of due process. The sealed order was converted without new judicial authorization.

That is a breach of judicial protocol, and it invalidates the resulting suspension of proceedings. This breach enabled a wrongful commitment to a state psychiatric facility and served as the gateway to the defendant’s unlawful incarceration and medical deprivation of rights.

To be clear: no lawful court order existed for the competency assessment.

The Public Defender’s Office: Enabler or Victim of the System?

The conduct of Deputy Public Defender Danielle Daroca-Bell, who facilitated this unauthorized evaluation, and her supervisor, Kristoffer McFarren, raises major red flags. Mr. Vernon Patterson, the Bar Panel attorney later appointed after these violations, confirmed in writing that he could not locate a court order authorizing the 730 evaluation.

Yet both attorneys insisted the evaluation and commitment were standard—even as the very legal foundation for the assessment was missing. The implications? This was state coercion masquerading as due process.

The Consequences: A Trap of Judicial Compartmentalization

The fraudulent assessment led to a suspension of criminal proceedings and the issuance of a bench warrant—used to deny the defendant access to legal recourse, press, and correspondence. All this while the defendant, who had previously requested disclosure of all legal records and sought due process, was forced to play legal detective while navigating homelessness and mental health court without stable legal representation.

Through sheer persistence, the defendant forced the disclosure of the sealed order on May 28, 2025, after the bench warrant had been issued. This is the smoking gun. Everything after October 2, 2023, was based on a legal falsehood.

The Judiciary Cannot Be Allowed to Violate Its Own Orders

When a court violates its own sealed order, the chain reaction undermines public trust in every pillar of the justice system. This is not merely a technical issue—it’s a constitutional crisis.

The judiciary cannot act as lawmaker, enforcer, and violator. To allow this to go unaddressed is to sanction the collapse of legal legitimacy.