September 16, 2025: Judge Rejects Defense Motion to Dismiss Public Corruption Charges Against City Councilmember Curren Price

A preliminary hearing is set for Nov. 3 in the Foltz Criminal Justice Center

LOS ANGELES - A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge today rejected in its entirety Curren Price's motion to dismiss felony public corruption charges filed by the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office, ruling that the case will move forward with a preliminary hearing on Nov. 3.

"Public officials will not violate the public trust on my watch," Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan J. Hochman said. "The District Attorney's Office, by law, is mandated to serve as a watchdog against public corruption. Politicians are entrusted with immense power and control over vast sums of money and are accordingly bound to act in the interests of the public, not their pocketbook. Our Public Integrity Division will continue to hold politicians accountable. We look forward to moving forward with the criminal justice process in this case."

Curren De Mille Price Jr. has been the Los Angeles City Councilmember for the 9th District since 2013. Like all other councilmembers, he is prohibited from having a financial interest associated with any project that comes before the City Council.

Price (dob 12/16/50) was charged by the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office on June 13, 2023, in case BA515782 with five felony counts of embezzlement of government funds, two felony counts of conflict of interest, and three felony counts of perjury. On Aug 12, 2025, prosecutors filed an amended complaint alleging two additional counts of conflict of interest.

Price has been arraigned on all charges. He pleaded not guilty to all charges and denied all allegations.

Conflicts of Interest

The conflict-of-interest charges involve Curren Price voting on projects where his wife, Delbra Pettice Richardson, was subcontracted by a developer or directly contracted by the City.

Richardson's company allegedly received payments totaling more than $950,000 between 2019 and 2021 from developers, the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles and LA Metro before Price voted to approve projects.

During this time, Price brought and voted in favor of a motion to award $30 million to LA Metro and voted to support a $35 million federal grant and a state grant application for $252 million for the Housing Authority. Price's staff had flagged the conflicts prior to the votes.

Perjury

The perjury charges stem from Price failing to disclose those conflicts on California Fair Political Practices Commission Form 700.

Embezzlement

The embezzlement charges involve Price fraudulently claiming City medical benefits. Price is accused of embezzling approximately $33,800 in city funds from 2013-2017 to pay for medical benefits for Richardson, who he falsely claimed was his wife while still legally married to Lynn Suzette Price.

Further Allegations

The amended complaint alleges that Price took advantage of his position in city government to award city lease agreements and over $2 million in federal COVID-19 grants to the nonprofit Home at Last, which was a paying tenant of Urban Healthcare Project, where Price served as CEO at the time of the votes. These funds were intended for homelessness efforts.

Sept. 16 Proceedings

Price appeared today in Department 42 of the Foltz Criminal Justice Center. The Court denied in its entirety the Aug. 14 defense motion to dismiss the charges.

The Court rejected Price's arguments that the charges do not state a crime; his votes on projects should not be grouped but rather be charged as individual offenses; and the charges are barred by statutes of limitations.

After Watergate, California voters passed the Political Reform Act to end public corruption. The Act tasked the California Fair Political Practices Commission and District Attorney's Offices with enforcing the law.

As prosecutors explained in court and in court filings, conflicts of interest encompass preliminary negotiations, compromises, reasoning, planning, drawing of plans and specifications and solicitation for bids. The law is written not only to strike at actual impropriety, but at the appearance of impropriety. The focus is on the financial interest at stake. An official can incur liability even if they abstain from voting.

Price also argued that an investigative grand jury impermissibly engaged in discovery and elected not to indict Price. Under California law, investigative grand juries, by definition, investigate and do not indict.

Price now faces a preliminary hearing on Nov. 3, where the prosecution will put on witnesses and evidence in support of the charges alleged. The hearing is scheduled for Nov. 3 in Department 42 of the Foltz Criminal Justice Center.

If convicted as charged, Price faces a maximum sentence of 11 years and four months in custody, including up to nine years and four months in state prison and up to two years in county jail.

The case is being prosecuted by Deputy District Attorney Casey Higgins of the Public Integrity Division and is being investigated by the District Attorney's Bureau of Investigation.

The charges filed in this case are allegations. The defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in a court of law.