LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- The original judge has been dead for 15 years, and no one has been able to find the criminal case file since 2004. Yet a 1977 sex scandal involving famed director Roman Polanski and a 13-year-old girl continues to stalk the courts of Los Angeles.



Academy Award-winning director Roman Polanski hasn't left France in 30 years because of a U.S. fugitive warrant.



Attorneys for the 75-year-old Academy Award-winning director asked a judge Tuesday to put the matter to rest once and for all. But a judge denied the request, saying the director must show up in court to obtain a ruling.



That poses problems for Polanksi because prosecutors have vowed to seek his arrest on a bench warrant the minute he sets foot in the United States. The bench warrant was issued when Polanski failed to appear for sentencing more than 30 years ago.



Lawyers Douglas Dalton and Chad Hummel last month filed a 239-page dismissal "request," citing allegations brought to light in the documentary, "Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired." The documentary was first broadcast in June on HBO, which shares a corporate parent with CNN.



The court filing alleges that a meddling prosecutor who believed Polanski should be behind bars improperly influenced a judge to ignore the terms of a plea bargain, as well as the wishes of the district attorney's office, the probation officer and the victim. None of them wanted Polanski to serve jail time.



Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Peter Espinoza left the door open to reconsider his ruling if Polanski, who has lived in exile in France since 1977, shows up in court.



"It's hard to contest some of the behavior in the documentary was misconduct," Espinoza said in court.



But he declined to dismiss the case entirely, a decision that didn't surprise legal experts who said such rulings are extremely rare.



"You have to give [Polanski attorney] Chad Hummel the creative lawyering of the year award," said legal analyst Laurie Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.



Espinoza in effect said he was tossing out the request without considering whether it has merit because Polanski hasn't shown up for court.



But he suspended his ruling, writing that "if the defendant submits to the jurisdiction of this Court within 30 days, the Court shall consider the merits of the motion."



Polanski's victim is among those calling for the case to be tossed out.



Larry Silver, the victim's lawyer, said he was disappointed in the ruling and that Espinoza "did not get to the merits and consider the clear proof of both judicial and prosecutorial corruption."



He argued in court that had "Mr. Polanski been treated fairly" his client would not still be suffering because of publicity almost 32 years after the incident.



Levinson said the victim's support may offer a sliver of hope for Polanski.



"The best thing he has going is the victim," she said. "In this age of victims' rights, if I were the lawyer I would be playing that card too."



But prosecutors have consistently argued that dismissing the Polanski case would be a miscarriage of justice, allowing a man who "drugged and raped a 13-year-old child" to go free.



Polanski's attorneys back up the allegation with a DVD of the documentary, a script, a copy of Polanski's 1977 pre-sentencing report and various court transcripts, interviews and declarations.



They paint a picture of backroom conversations between a prosecutor itching for a piece of the case and a judge so image conscious that he kept a scrapbook of media clippings, asked lawyers to "stage" Polanski's sentencing hearing and feared criticism if he didn't send the director to prison.



Allegations of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct are commonly raised on appeal, but only a small percentage of these appeals succeed.



Polanski pleaded guilty in 1977 to a single count of having unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. The director, his lawyer and the prosecutor handling the case believed they'd hammered out a deal that would spare the young
When did Roman Polanski fled the U.S.? When did the case start? What did the director acknowledge? What felony did the director commit? Who is Roman Polanski? Who denied the motion to throw out the charges? What is the felony's name?
1977 1977 Polanski pleaded guilty in 1977 to a single count of having unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. "drugged and raped a 13-year-old child" Academy Award-winning director Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Peter Espinoza left the door open Roman Polanski
question: When did Roman Polanski fled the U.S.?, answer: 1977 | question: When did the case start?, answer: 1977 | question: What did the director acknowledge?, answer: Polanski pleaded guilty in 1977 to a single count of having unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. | question: What felony did the director commit?, answer: "drugged and raped a 13-year-old child" | question: Who is Roman Polanski?, answer: Academy Award-winning director | question: Who denied the motion to throw out the charges?, answer: Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Peter Espinoza left the door open | question: What is the felony's name?, answer: Roman Polanski