This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
News

Criminal

Jul. 23, 2002

Judge's Action in '20th Hijacker' Case Isn't Unusual, Experts Say

LOS ANGELES - When a federal judge last week put off accepting a guilty plea from Sept. 11 conspiracy suspect Zacarias Moussaoui, commentators described it as a rare and somewhat perplexing development.

By Susan McRae
Daily Journal Staff Writer
        LOS ANGELES - When a federal judge last week put off accepting a guilty plea from Sept. 11 conspiracy suspect Zacarias Moussaoui, commentators described it as a rare and somewhat perplexing development.
        After all, what judge would pass up the chance to strike a blow against terrorism while disposing of a potentially messy, high-security trial with so little fuss?
        But it turns out that it isn't that unusual to reject a guilty plea in a death penalty case - particularly, as in Moussaoui's case, if the defendant isn't represented by counsel.
        In fact, California has a law against it.
        California Penal Code Section 1018, enacted in 1872, states, in part, "No plea of guilty of a felony for which the maximum punishment is death ... shall be received from a defendant who does not appear with counsel, nor shall that plea be received without the consent of the defendant's counsel."
        "It was a fairly enlightened statute for the West at that time," Chief Assistant District Attorney Curt Livesay, an expert in the state's death-penalty laws, said.
        The law has been tested on at least two occasions, and it passed with flying colors.
        In 1985, a San Francisco judge allowed a defendant to plead guilty in a special circumstances murder and robbery case and subsequently sentenced him to death. An appellate court overturned the verdict because, even though the defendant's attorney allowed him to plead guilty, it was without the lawyer's "knowing and informed consent." People v. Massie, 40 Cal. 3d 620 (1985).
        In a 1979 case, a judge allowed an unrepresented defendant, whose mental competency was questioned, to plead guilty and sentenced him to death, after the defendant admitted that he wanted the state's help in committing suicide. Citing the prohibition on such guilty pleas, a state appellate court reversed the death sentence. People v. Chad, 18 Cal. 3rd 739 (1979).
        While federal law does not bar guilty pleas by those who defend themselves, Assistant U.S. Attorney John Gordon said he couldn't recall a case comparable to Moussaoui, in which a judge refused to accept a guilty plea that could result in a death penalty.
        But the decision by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema's in the Moussaoui case is eminently understandable, according to criminal specialist Peter Arenella, a professor at the UCLA School of Law.
        "It's rare but not a shock," Arenella said of Brinkema's ruling. "A trial judge has discretion to reject a guilty plea when he or she thinks the public interest is not being served."
        Moreover, Arenella said, Brinkema wants to make sure Moussaoui fully understands that a guilty plea will not necessarily save his life. She also wants the defendant to have a chance to talk to his standby lawyer, Arenella added.
        Brinkema also could be concerned about having some sort of public airing of the evidence - a lot of which would be excluded if the case went straight to the penalty phase, Arenella said.
        The public-airing concern came up in another high-profile case of the 1960s: the June 6, 1968, assassination of Robert F. Kennedy at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles during his campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, Arenella said. In that case, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Herbert V. Walker rejected a guilty plea from defendant Sirhan Sirhan - even though Sirhan had competent counsel - based on public interest, Arenella said.
        Given the conspiracy theories swirling around the Kennedy assassinations and the possibility that the absence of a public trial could fuel public paranoia about concealing evidence, Walker believed it was important that the case have a full hearing, Arenella said.
        In her ruling last week, Brinkema told Moussaoui that he could negotiate with the government for a plea that would avoid the death penalty but that she would have no role in those negotiations, according to news reports.
        Moussaoui, a French citizen of Moroccan descent sometimes described as the "20th hijacker," is the first person charged in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
        Authorities arrested Moussaoui in August and detained him on immigration charges. After Sept. 11, he became a material witness. In the first indictment handed down in December, the government said that he had been taking flight training lessons to participate in the terrorist conspiracy.

#337231

Susan Mcraen

Daily Journal Staff Writer

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com