LOS ANGELES, CA – Lyle and Erik Menendez, convicted of killing their parents in 1989, have filed a motion to disqualify the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office from participating in their resentencing, according to a recent report by Variety.
The Menendez brothers were sentenced to life without parole for the double homicide. However, six months ago, then–District Attorney George Gascón recommended reducing their sentence to 50 years to life, which would have made the brothers immediately eligible for parole. Newly-elected District Attorney Nathan Hochman has since reversed that recommendation, Variety reports.
According to the 160-page motion filed by the brothers, the DA’s office—now under Hochman—has demonstrated conflicts of interest that call into question the fairness of the resentencing process. The motion highlights that Hochman has disregarded input from family members who support the brothers’ release and instead consulted only with Kathleen Cady, attorney for Milton Andersen, the sole family member opposing the resentencing.
In February 2025, California Governor Gavin Newsom ordered a risk assessment to evaluate whether the Menendez brothers would pose a danger if released. The assessment was recently completed, but Judge Michael Jesic stated he had not yet reviewed it. As a result, the resentencing hearing has been postponed to allow the report to be fully considered, Variety notes.
“There is no legitimate reason why the court should not possess the most current and up-to-date risk assessments before making any resentencing decisions in this case,” the brothers’ legal team wrote in the motion.
Tensions escalated further on April 11, when graphic crime scene photos were shown in court without warning. According to Variety, the images retraumatized relatives, prompting a formal complaint from family members. “We never imagined we would have to fight to be treated with respect and dignity,” the Menendez family said in a written statement.
The Menendez brothers’ attorneys concluded their motion by arguing that disqualification of the DA’s office is necessary. “Because the actions here raise ‘a reasonable possibility that the DA’s office may not exercise its discretionary function in an evenhanded manner’ and there is a genuine risk that Erik and Lyle will ‘be treated unfairly during some portion of the … proceedings,’ recusal is required,” they stated.
