Hedgecock Sues to Lift Contribution Limits for Legal Defense Fund

San Diego Mayor Roger Hedgecock filed suit late Wednesday against the City of San Diego and City Atty. John Witt, arguing that he cannot afford to hire a criminal defense attorney until “unconstitutional” limits to his legal defense fund are struck down.

Under San Diego’s 1975 campaign ordinance, contributions to a political campaign are restricted to a maximum of $250 per person. On Tuesday, Witt ruled that Hedgecock’s recently established legal defense fund, Californians for the Future, constituted a campaign committee under city law because it seeks to keep Hedgecock in office. Thus the $250 limit applies, Witt said.

Hedgecock’s chief fund-raiser, Nancy MacHutchin, who organized the fund, had been seeking donations of $1,000 and more to defray Hedgecock’s thousands of dollars in legal bills. MacHutchin voluntarily stopped solicitations in mid-January when Witt indicated that the $250 limit might apply to the defense fund. (Violations of the city’s campaign contribution ordinance are misdemeanors.)

In his suit, Hedgecock contends that the $250 limit is an unconstitutional violation of his rights under the First, Fifth and Sixth amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

The $250 limit denies him “the right to associate freely with potential contributors,” the right “to petition the government for redress of grievance,” the right to due process of law “because he has protected interest in not paying a fine, in not being incarcerated, in practicing law and in holding office,” Hedgecock claims in the suit.

In addition, the city’s campaign restrictions deny Hedgecock the right to choose effective counsel and the right to equal protection under the law “because he is being treated differently from other defendants who are not officeholders in the same actions in which he is a defendant and from other officeholders in other actions,” the suit said.

Hedgecock is accused of 15 felony counts and one misdemeanor count stemming from tens of thousands of dollars in contributions that allegedly were funneled illegally into his 1983 campaign for mayor. Two weeks ago, a mistrial was declared in Hedgecock’s case after a Superior Court jury deadlocked 11-1 for conviction. The district attorney’s office has announced that it intends to retry Hedgecock.

A conviction on any of the felony counts likely would force Hedgecock out of office.

In addition to the criminal charges, Hedgecock is a defendant in a $1.2-million civil suit filed by the Fair Political Practices Commission that charges 450 campaign reporting violations.

The dispute over Hedgecock’s defense fund could delay the mayor’s retrial, said Michael Pancer, Hedgecock’s attorney in the criminal trial.

Pancer said Wednesday that he plans to ask for a one-month delay in the scheduling of a new trial date at a Superior Court hearing today.

The delay is necessary, Pancer said, to give Hedgecock time to challenge Witt’s ruling in court and to allow the mayor to consider whether to hire a new attorney for his retrial. Pancer has said that his commitments to other clients would make it impossible for him to handle Hedgecock’s case before summer.

An early ruling on the petition is “urgent,” Hedgecock’s suit argued, because “Roger Hedgecock is unable to retain counsel (in criminal and civil cases) until his right to raise money for that purpose is determined by this court.”

Hedgecock’s suit, filed by San Diego attorney Leo Sullivan, does not describe the mayor’s legal expenses to date. It does note that the mayor “has incurred, and will continue to incur, substantial attorney fees and related litigation expenses incident to his defense of the criminal and civil actions.”

“Roger Hedgecock does not have sufficient personal resources to retain counsel to represent him in defense of the actions and chooses not to exhaust his personal resources for that purpose,” the brief continues.

It notes that “both individuals and organizations” have offered contributions in excess of the $250 city campaign contribution limit. “Unless he is allowed to accept the contributions, the mayor will not have sufficient resources to adequately defend himself,” the suit argued.

In an appendix to the suit, Sullivan attached a Dec. 19 letter to the San Diego city attorney’s office noting that defense funds won’t be spent for personal uses by Hedgecock or donated to any other San Diego candidate or political cause.