Attorney in trouble over advice in solicitation case
Judge cites potential conf lict of interest
When attorney Lisa Torraco advised her client in a child solicitation case to delete his email account, she created “a potentially serious conflict of interest” in which Torraco herself could then be called to testify as a witness on behalf of her client, who was also indicted for tampering with evidence.
Consequently, state District Judge Briana H. Zamora last week denied Torraco’s motion to sever the first count of child solicitation by electronic communication device from the second count of tampering with evidence. Torraco’s motion, if granted, would have allowed her to represent her client, Tyler Danzer, on the child solicitation charge, while co-counsel Liane Kerr could separately represent Danzer on the tampering charge.
Zamora has yet to rule on a motion from the state Attorney General’s Office to remove Torraco altogether from the Danzer case, nor has Zamora ruled on Torraco’s countermotion to remove the AG’s Office from the case.
In her ruling on the motion to sever the two counts in the Danzer case, Zamora wrote that, even if Torraco were solely a witness on the count of evidence tampering, she would have to “provide a pretrial interview” and the state would be allowed to question her about her involvement in advising Danzer to close his email account.
Further, as a witness, Torraco would be subject to the rule of exclusion, “which prevents her from being present during the testimony of other witnesses during a trial or evidentiary hearing.”
Combined, these things “create a potentially serious conflict of interest, irrespective of whether the charges are severed,” Zamora said.
Danzer was arrested last year on a charge of child solicitation and tampering with evidence. He is accused of using emails to exchange sexually explicit messages and solicit
sex from someone he thought was an underage girl, but in reality was investigators pretending to be the child.
Torraco, who is also a Republican state senator from Albuquerque, said she advised her client after his arrest — but before the return of the indictment that included evidence tampering — to close the account to avoid further unwanted communications with disguised police.