SF homicide defendant Rickleffs fired attorney for being gay, ‘the Antichrist’

A man previously convicted of killing a gay hair stylist whose homicide and robbery convictions were overturned more than a year ago fired his attorney for being gay. Defendant James Rickleffs characterized his former lawyer as “the Antichrist,” court transcripts show. 

As the Bay Area Reporter previously reported, Rickleffs fired his attorney, Michael Meehan, on August 18, just as jury selection for his second trial was underway in San Francisco Superior Court. The 2019 conviction of Rickleffs, 58, had been reversed in October 2023 by a three-judge panel of the California Court of Appeal. He'd been found guilty in the 2012 killing and robbery of Steven "Eriq" Escalon in San Francisco's Diamond Heights neighborhood. 

A new trial had been set for this summer – and indeed over 100 prospective jurors were waiting to see if they’d be selected when, according to a transcript obtained by the B.A.R., it came to the attention of San Francisco Superior Court Judge Alexandra Robert Gordon that Rickleffs wanted to fire Meehan.

“It was my understanding that it is his position that we will not be proceeding to trial today because he has fired his lawyer,” Gordon said. “That's not actually Mr. Rickleffs's decision to make. It's mine. But I'm happy to hear your position, Mr. Rickleffs. What is going on?”

Rickleffs said, “It's, kind of, iconic in this county/city is that they made a big thing about the decedent being gay, that other people and the players in this game – which is unfolded – being gay. And it turns out that – you know, I asked him previously before hiring, and it turned out that my attorney is gay.”

Rickleffs said of Meehan’s sexual orientation, “For me, that's the Antichrist, in the sense that no way does his beliefs balance with my beliefs, and nobody of that nature could represent me.”

Responded Gordon, “Because your understanding is that Mr. Meehan is a member of the – he's a gay man and as you say that's ‘the Antichrist’ to you, tell me what that means. Like, can you work with someone who is gay?”

Answered Rickleffs, “No, I can't, ma'am. … I rely on Jesus Christ, and that's what follows and leads me. This person doesn't believe in that.”

Meehan characterized Rickleffs’ decision as “more of a one-sided communication that he was intending to fire me.”

“I was talking to him, trying to explain to him what would happen, and he did not want to hear that,” Meehan said.

During the recent court hearing, Meehan said that he is gay.

“My sexual orientation, I don't think, plays a role in my representation of people,” Meehan said. “But, also, it was never hidden or lied to the defendant about it. If it was asked by me or anyone else that they would not have lied about that because it's not a secret or something that I'm ashamed of.”

Gordon agreed, responding, “Nor should it be.”

Rickleffs alleged he’d been misled before hiring Meehan, citing someone named Anita. (No last name was provided in the transcript for Anita.)

“Anita was one that assured me in a different phone conversation, ‘I assure you’ – the exact words was – ‘nobody of that nature is in this office,’” Rickleffs said.

A person with that first name who is at Meehan’s office didn’t immediately return comment.

After Gordon delayed the trial, the B.A.R. reached out to Meehan about why he was fired. In an August 19 statement, he stated, “Mr. Rickleffs fired me as counsel for reasons he stated on the record in Department 28. The court granted the request because Mr. Rickleffs stated that he would no longer communicate with me as his attorney. The court explained to Mr. Rickleffs that he had been well defended to that point, but she felt she had to grant his request even though we were in a jury trial because he was not going to communicate with his counsel going forward.”

After the B.A.R. received the hearing transcript, Meehan did not return a follow-up request for comment. Roberto Tiscarano, a friend of Escalon’s, and the San Francisco District Attorney’s office also have not responded to requests for comment about the transcript.

Meehan, who’s in private practice, took over Rickleffs’ representation from the San Francisco Public Defender’s office following the appeal. The transcript does not state how Rickleffs, who remains in custody, discovered Meehan is gay.

Victim, defendant met in Castro
The charges against Rickleffs stem from 2012, when, according to prosecutors, Escalon and Rickleffs met during underwear night at the bar 440 Castro in San Francisco's LGBTQ neighborhood.

"Rickleffs, as a straight-identifying man, went to the Castro with tape and a knife, sat there drinking, and, I believe, snorted narcotics in the bathroom, waiting for someone," Tiscareno said during the August 2021 sentencing hearing.

After going home with Escalon to his Diamond Heights apartment near Twin Peaks early on the morning of June 12, 2012, prosecutors said Rickleffs tied Escalon up, gagged him, and poured poppers on his face to immobilize him. Then he left Escalon's apartment with a suitcase of items including a laptop, Escalon's checkbook, and a bankcard of one of Escalon's roommates.

Escalon died of an overdose of amyl nitrates and GHB, according to the medical examiner's report. He was found dead by his roommates, and Rickleffs was arrested September 12, 2012, in possession of the suitcase.

In explaining their reasoning behind their 2019 decision to convict, most jurors said they felt Escalon's death was caused by many factors, including the obstruction of his breathing from the gag, his inability to move from being bound, and the drugs found in his system. While they unanimously agreed that Rickleffs did not intend to kill Escalon, the jurors said it was the robbery and disregard for human life that swayed them to find him guilty of felony murder. 

Rickleffs was sentenced in 2021 to 50 years to life in state prison. That conviction, however, was overturned by a state appellate court two years ago. The Fifth Division of the state's 1st District Court of Appeal October 24, 2023, ruling – in an opinion written by Justice Mark B. Simons – gave several reasons for its decision. For one, a California Supreme Court ruling in People v. Brown (2023) threw out the very jury instructions for a murder by poison charge that were used in Rickleffs' case.

Simons also questioned the forensic evidence presented at trial – including a key NMS Labs report that found nitrates and gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GHB) in Escalon's system.
Simons also stated that the instructions on the robbery charge were also wrong because Escalon rendered himself unable to resist.

Judge reviews options
During the August hearing, according to the transcript of the proceeding, Gordon explained to Rickleffs, “If I allow you to fire your attorney so that you can find an attorney who – with whom you’re more comfortable and will actually be able to assist in your defense, you will remain in county jail – and I know you don't like that – for as long as your pretrial and your trial takes.”

Answered Rickleffs, “If that's how you feel, Your Honor, I respect that.”

To which Gordon replied, “It's not how I feel. It's simply the reality of how it works. So it's not actually a decision being made by me. It's – this is how this works.”

Assistant District Attorney Edward Mario, who’s prosecuting the case, said the imbroglio was “a difficult place that I find the People to be in.”

“As your honor has noted, there has been a lot of work put into preparation for this trial. The family of the victim has been going through all of the typical difficult emotions that you would anticipate as we approach the eve of trial,” Mario stated. “Mr. Rickleffs is certainly entitled to the counsel of his choosing. And, without a pattern at this point, it is difficult to make a full-throated argument that this is merely a delay tactic.”

None of this was with any negative feelings toward Meehan.

“I believe that I've seen a lot of competence from Mr. Meehan, but I don't feel like I'm in a position that I can fully object, given the circumstances and representations that have been made here,” Mario said. 

When all was said and done, Gordon allowed Rickleffs to fire Meehan.

“My concern is if I do not allow the substitution of counsel that I will infect this trial with error from, pretty much, the outset of jurors being here and that it will be reversed, and everyone will have to start all over again,” Gordon ruled. “That's not a risk that I am willing to take.”

Gordon said, “I find Mr. Meehan to be prepared, and I find his representation to be well more than adequate.”

“I don't believe that one is under any obligation to share one's sexual orientation with people, nor do I believe that sexual orientation has any bearing on people's abilities,” Gordon said. “I'm aware that other people have very different beliefs about that. And while those are not my beliefs, I have to respect them. And I certainly have to respect them where it seems that that's a dealbreaker for a defendant in a criminal matter facing life on murder and robbery and that that appears to be, with other issues, I guess, as well, causing a near-complete breakdown in communication. And I think that breakdown is one-sided in that I see that Mr. Meehan is here and still willing to communicate with Mr. Rickleffs. Mr. Rickleffs does not want to communicate and will not communicate with Mr. Meehan.”

Rickleffs’ next court date is October 20 at 9 a.m. in Department 22 at San Francisco’s Hall of Justice, 850 Bryant Street.