I am not from CA, but that is not what the article says. The article examines a case handled by the Riverside CA DA's office. The AG's office handles appeals on cases from the county level and that was how the AG was involved at the 9th circuit. From a prosecutorial standpoint, the day to day decisions as far as charging decisions, trial preparation, presenting evidence etc. are handled at the local, not state, level. The case at issue in the article doesn't show that Sen harris as AG encouraged local offices to use fraudulent evidence to get convictions. It shows that the AG's office did initially defend the local office while that case was on appeal, but later abandoned the defense. ISo I suppose you are correct that the AG's office did "attempt to prevent federal courts from reviewing them," by defending the appeal but then they abandoned that defense. The main issue in that article seems to be about the judicial bar in general not sanctioning prosecutor's when they do present false evidence. Are there other articles that show that Sen Harris, either as a ADA, DA or AG presented false evidence and/or encouraged subordinates to do so? I would be interested in reading more if that is the case but this article just examines one case where the AG did little more than initially defend the local office on appeal--as opposed to being the ones who orchestrated the false evidence.