CA Appeals court overturns former UCLA gynecologist’s sexual abuse conviction

A California appeals court has overturned the sexual abuse conviction of a former University of California, Los Angeles gynecologist and ordered a new trial, ruling that the defendant was denied a fair proceeding. A three justice panel from California’s Second District Court of Appeal concluded that the trial judge failed to disclose a critical juror related issue to defense counsel, undermining the integrity of the trial, NPR reported today.

The ruling centers on a note sent to the court by the jury foreman during deliberations, raising concerns that one juror lacked sufficient English proficiency to properly perform their duties. According to the appellate court, the note was never shared with the defense at the time, preventing counsel from addressing the issue while the trial was still underway. Defense attorneys said they did not discover the note until roughly two years later, when it was found during appellate review.

Former gynecologist James Heaps was sentenced in 2023 to 11 years in prison after being convicted on multiple charges related to the sexual abuse of female patients. Following the appeals court decision, his attorney said the nondisclosure of the juror concern deprived Heaps of his constitutional right to effective counsel during a critical stage of the trial.

Heaps was accused of sexually abusing hundreds of patients over the course of a 35 year career at University of California, Los Angeles. The allegations led UCLA to pay nearly $700 million to resolve civil lawsuits brought by former patients, a figure that at the time represented the largest known payout tied to sexual abuse claims at a public university.

Criminally, Heaps pleaded not guilty to 21 felony counts involving seven women, with allegations spanning from 2009 to 2018. A jury convicted him in 2022 on five counts, including sexual battery by fraud and sexual penetration involving two patients. Jurors acquitted him on seven counts and were deadlocked on the remainder.

In its 31 page opinion, the appellate panel noted that concerns about the juror’s ability to understand English were raised within roughly an hour of the juror being seated as a substitute. The court described the issue as too serious to ignore, even while acknowledging the burden a retrial would place on witnesses and survivors.

Prosecutors now have 30 days to seek further review, but the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office has stated it intends to retry Heaps as soon as possible. The appellate court emphasized that protecting the constitutional right to counsel outweighed the practical difficulties of retrying a case involving multiple victims and deeply personal testimony.