In a dramatic turn of events Friday, a day that many expected would end with convicted killer Paul Garcia sentenced to life in prison, defense lawyers instead asked that the presiding judge be disqualified from the case, claiming he could no longer be “fair and impartial.”

Garcia’s defense lawyers contend that Santa Clara Superior Court Judge David Cena couldn’t help but be biased against Garcia after reading a 60-page declaration by Garcia’s original lawyer, which included secrets that are “extraordinarily prejudicial and damning to Mr. Garcia.”

Garcia’s family and friends who packed more than half the courtroom Friday appeared happy and relieved. His parents and brother believe he was framed and that the Mexican Mafia gang, not a jealous Garcia, was responsible for killing Mark Achilli. But the family and friends of Achilli, a beloved Los Gatos restaurateur gunned down in his driveway four years ago, were visibly upset.

“Send his rear end to prison where he belongs and let him do his appeal from jail,” Chuck Cucco, an old friend of Achilli who attended much of the two-month trial in late 2010, said after the hearing. “It was all I could do not to stand up and say something.”

Garcia — who is being held in county jail — was convicted of first-degree murder in the March 2008 death of Achilli, from whom Garcia and his brother bought Mountain Charley’s Saloon and the 180 Restaurant & Lounge seven months before Achilli’s death. Prosecutor Jeff Rosen convinced a jury that Garcia was so obsessed with Achilli’s girlfriend, a bartender at Mountain Charley’s, that he arranged for a killer to gun him down, for which he paid $9,500. Achilli was shot eight times in broad daylight.

The middleman and shooter from Southern California were both tried and convicted with Garcia. But unlike Garcia, they were sentenced months ago.

Garcia’s case turned upside down a year ago, however, when his original defense lawyer, Harry Robertson, withdrew from the case after the guilty verdict but before sentencing, citing an undisclosed conflict of interest. A new lawyer, Ed Sousa, was appointed by the court to replace him. For the past year, Sousa has been building a case for a new trial, contending largely that Robertson was incompetent.

Earlier this month, Robertson filed a sealed declaration, defending himself against accusations he did a poor job for his client. It is that declaration which caused the courtroom chaos Friday.

After the hearing, Robertson was reluctant to discuss the case in detail, except to say that “we worked very hard to try to respond only to the issues raised in their pleadings.”

But Sousa and former Judge Gregory Ward, who is helping Sousa with the case pro bono, say that the contents of Robertson’s declaration violate the confidentiality of an attorney-client privilege between Robertson and Garcia and include information that should remain secret.

Because Cena, the presiding trial judge, read that declaration over the past couple of weeks, Sousa and Ward believe he can no longer be “fair and impartial.” They told Cena during the Friday hearing that they were filing a motion to have him disqualified from the case.

They also acknowledged Friday that they didn’t warn Cena not to read the document until a week after Robertson had filed it. It was not so much that Cena was wrong to read it in the first place, they said, but that Robertson included secrets that were “irrelevant” to the claims against him.

“As a result of the gratuitous disclosure of confidential information in the Robertson declaration,” the motion to disqualify Cena read, “the court has learned inadmissible, inflammatory and prejudicial information … that should never have been disclosed to anyone, let along to the judge who must rule on defendant’s motion for a new trial.”

When lawyers are accused of incompetent counsel, the attorney-client privilege is waived when defending themselves against specific charges. However, Sousa and Ward contend that Robertson went too far.

The courtroom was so packed that some had to wait outside in the hallway. Many were expecting Garcia’s defense lawyers to make their case for a new trial, not ask that the judge be disqualified. Robertson was also in the courtroom, prepared to take the witness stand to defend his performance.

Had Cena ruled against the new trial motion, Garcia could have been sentenced to prison immediately.

Instead, the motion to disqualify the judge threw the case into new territory. Cena set April 20 for the next hearing, but if another judge agrees that Cena should be disqualified, all bets are off.

Contact Julia Prodis Sulek at 408-278-3409.