State Justices Appear Split on Prop. 115 : Law: Opponents of the anti-crime initiative say it revises the Constitution. Court holds spirited debate on far-reaching issue.

An apparently divided state Supreme Court heard spirited debate Tuesday over whether it should uphold Proposition 115 as a valid act by the voters or strike it down as a violation of the justices’ power to interpret the California Constitution.

Opponents said the sweeping anti-crime initiative, approved last June, improperly intruded on state judicial authority by limiting defendants’ rights to only those protections required by the U.S. Supreme Court under the federal Constitution.

“For the first time, the state Supreme Court cannot construe the state Constitution as it sees fit,” said David B. Goodwin, a San Francisco lawyer representing foes of the measure. “It all but eliminates the use of the California Constitution as an independent guarantor of the liberties of the citizens of this state.”

But state prosecutors defended the measure, saying it was a lawful use of the initiative power and posed no threat to the legitimate authority of the judiciary.

“The Constitution belongs to the people,” said state Deputy Atty. Gen. Clifford K. Thompson. “They may adopt a constitutional amendment which defines constitutional rights . . . . They did not change the judicial function, which is to apply the law but not to make it.”

The justices, meeting in Los Angeles, conducted an hourlong hearing on the measure--one of their most far-reaching cases.

Questions from the court implied there is sharp disagreement among the justices--with some members of its conservative majority seemingly favoring the measure but its liberal minority strongly opposed.

Justice Stanley Mosk, a staunch defender of broader states’ rights, suggested caustically that the initiative effectively amended the California Constitution to vest “judicial power in the state Supreme Court and the federal courts of the United States.”

A decision is due within 90 days. Another dispute, over whether the initiative can be applied to cases that were pending when it was passed, is awaiting argument. Meanwhile, the initiative remains in effect pending the outcome of the cases.

Proposition 115, passed with a 57% majority, was aimed at eliminating the more expansive rights granted criminal defendants by the state Supreme Court when it was dominated by a liberal majority.

The measure changes the state Constitution to require state courts to apply the more limited rulings of the federal high court on such rights as due process and equal protection of the law. The initiative also calls for wide-ranging changes in state statutes to reduce delays in the criminal process.