Hedgecock Case Ends With Compromise

After two trials, more than 6 1/2 years of litigation and what he termed “a lifetime or two . . . on an emotional roller coaster,” former Mayor Roger Hedgecock’s political corruption case ended abruptly Thursday with Hedgecock accepting his conviction on a single felony in return for no jail sentence and no retrial.

In a carefully worded settlement crafted to permit face-saving on both sides, Hedgecock agreed not to appeal a felony conspiracy count stemming from illegal campaign contributions to his 1983 mayoral race. However, under terms negotiated with the San Diego County district attorney’s office, that count will be reduced to a misdemeanor early next year.

Under the agreement signed before Superior Court Judge Jesus Rodriguez, Hedgecock will file for outright dismissal of the charge after his three-year probation period ends in about six weeks. In addition to not contesting that request, prosecutors also agreed not to retry Hedgecock on 12 felony perjury counts that he had been convicted of in 1985 but which were overturned by the state Supreme Court last summer.

Hedgecock also agreed to pay a $5,000 fine--five times higher than his original fine--and accepted a one-day jail sentence, which he will not have to serve because of one day’s credit being granted for his initial booking.

Although both sides expressed satisfaction with Thursday’s settlement, Hedgecock appeared to gain more from the unexpectedly quick finale to a case that he has often described as “the country’s longest-running political soap opera.” Until the agreement was reached, the case appeared headed for another protracted round of legal maneuvering next week, when Hedgecock’s motion for a new trial--a request based on allegations that a court bailiff tampered with his jury during its deliberations--was scheduled to be heard.

The settlement not only wiped out the one-year jail sentence to which Hedgecock had been sentenced after his October, 1985, conviction on 13 felony conspiracy and perjury counts, but also will ultimately remove the felony charge that could have cost him his law license and barred him from running for public office.

Though Hedgecock, now a popular radio talk-show host, reiterated Thursday that he does not intend to either practice law or resume his public career, the former mayor stressed that the settlement will “finally clear the slate . . . and let me move on.”

Describing himself as having “mixed emotions” about the outcome, Hedgecock said that, although he is delighted to have the case behind him, he also was disappointed over not being vindicated either by being found innocent or via prosecutors’ dismissal of the charges.

“Justice was not done in this case, because I did not commit these crimes,” Hedgecock said outside the courtroom. “As I said to the judge, I may have to accept some consequences here to compromise and put this behind us. But I did not commit these crimes, and I think that history will so judge.”

Dist. Atty. Edwin Miller, meanwhile, emphasized that the settlement enabled prosecutors to “salvage a conviction, a felony conviction . . . which is exceedingly important. It means that the acts upon which we based our prosecution have been confirmed.”

During the brief court proceeding, Rodriguez, referring to the lengthy, circuitous route the case has taken since prosecutors began investigating Hedgecock in early 1984, characterized the settlement as being fair “both to the parties . . . and the public.”

“It’s time to end this case, put this case to rest here today,” Rodriguez said. “To further continue with this case, we will have nothing but extensive and expensive criminal proceedings.”

Thursday’s settlement will have no direct effect on a civil lawsuit filed against Hedgecock by the state Fair Political Practices Commission. That lawsuit, which stemmed from many of the same charges at issue in Hedgecock’s two felony trials, had been postponed pending resolution of Hedgecock’s criminal case. However, Hedgecock said late Thursday that the case may “simply dry up and blow away” because a five-year statute of limitations has expired.

After his first criminal case ended in a mistrial in February, 1985, Hedgecock was found guilty in his second trial eight months later of conspiring with two former principals of the now-defunct La Jolla investment firm of J. David & Co. to funnel more than $350,000 in illegal donations to his 1983 mayoral campaign. The perjury counts alleged that Hedgecock intentionally falsified campaign and personal financial disclosure statements to conceal that aid.

Days after Hedgecock’s conviction, however, two jurors signed sworn affidavits alleging that a court bailiff had improperly discussed the case and their deliberations while they were sequestered in a local hotel. According to the two jurors--whose claims were contradicted in part by statements from the 10 other jurors--the bailiff helped jurors define the legal term reasonable doubt , pressured them to reach a verdict quickly by reminding them of the cost of the hotel where they were staying and provided jurors with alcoholic beverages after their daily deliberations.

In overturning all 12 perjury counts and setting aside the remaining conspiracy charge pending a hearing on the jury-tampering allegations, the state Supreme Court ruled that then-Superior Court Judge William L. Todd Jr. erred by ruling that omissions on Hedgecock’s financial statements were sufficient--or, in legal jargon, “material” enough--to support the charges.

Todd also made a mistake, the high court ruled, by not allowing a full-blown hearing on the jury-tampering charges, deciding the issue solely on the basis of the jurors’ and bailiffs’ written affidavits and the competing attorneys’ arguments.

Now a justice on the 4th District Court of Appeal, Todd was recently asked to conduct the new trial hearing by Presiding Superior Court Judge Judith McConnell. Because Todd’s own conduct and that of his bailiff were central issues in that proceeding, Hedgecock attorney Charles Sevilla questioned his ability to be impartial.

Todd’s assignment to the case, Hedgecock said, convinced him anew that he “could not get a fair trial in San Diego”--a factor that prompted his attorney to begin settlement talks with prosecutors several weeks ago.

“It became clear to me that the district attorney was not going to leave well enough alone,” Hedgecock said. “He was determined to continue retrying this as many times as it took to try to nail me with something. After six years . . . I think we’ve made our point, and it was time to end this.”

Beyond trying to preserve--albeit temporarily--a felony conviction, Miller said that prosecutors’ incentive in trying to reach a settlement lay primarily in ending a case “that’s beginning to get barnacles on it.”

“The time had come for a compromise settlement, which it was,” Miller said.

Although the Hedgecock case riveted public attention here throughout the mid-1980s, the passage of time, coupled with the repeated earlier failures to resolve it, caused interest in it to wane except among those whose lives were most directly touched by the compelling legal and political drama.

“I think the only people who are still interested are those who were there,” said lawyer Michael McDade, Hedgecock’s former City Hall chief of staff and a key witness in both trials. “There is so much in-migration in San Diego that, when the subject comes up, people say, ‘Who’s Hedgecock? What’s this all about.’ A lot of people just don’t remember it. I wonder what we would have testified to at another trial, it’s been so long. It’s just a relief to have it all finished.”

His own “exhausted relief . . . and gratification” with Thursday’s court developments notwithstanding, Hedgecock remained firm in his belief that the prosecution had been from the first a vindictive political act.

“The district attorney has used the criminal justice system in this case to prosecute a political opponent and to continue that prosecution until that political opponent was out of politics,” Hedgecock said. “He did what he set out to do.”

Times staff writers Alan Abrahamson and Armando Acuna contributed to this report.

THE MAJOR PLAYERS, A41

CHRONOLOGY OF THE LEGAL WOES OF FORMER MAYOR ROGER HEDGECOCK

Feb. 9, 1984: The J. David & Co. investment firm is sued by an investor who claims that the owner, J. David (Jerry) Dominelli failed to return a $1.2-million deposit. Hedgecock friend Nancy Hoover, who was Dominelli’s business aide and girlfriend as well as a former mayor of Del Mar, provides the link for what prosecutors alleged was a conspiracy to illegally funnel thousands of dollars into Hedgecock’s 1983 mayoral campaign.

Feb. 27, 1984: The state’s Fair Political Practices Commission, or FPPC, begins an investigation into Hedgecock’s finances.

April 9, 1984: The district attorney opens a criminal investigation.

May 22, 1984: Dist. Atty. Edwin Miller files a civil suit against Hedgecock.

June 5, 1984: Hedgecock wins the mayoral primary but is forced into a November runoff.

June 30, 1984: The first grand jury to look into Hedgecock’s finances is dismantled without returning an indictment.

July 30, 1984: A second grand jury begins hearings.

Sept. 19, 1984: The grand jury indicts Hedgecock, Hoover, Shepard and Dominelli on felony conspiracy and perjury charges.

Oct. 15, 1984: The FPPC files a $1.2-million suit against Hedgecock, Shepard, Hoover, Dominelli, and others, citing more than 450 violations of the city’s campaign laws. The FPPC asks for nearly $1 million in penalties from Hedgecock alone.

Nov. 6, 1984: Hedgecock overwhelmingly wins reelection.

Nov. 15, 1984: The grand jury again indicts Hedgecock.

Feb. 13, 1985: Jury votes 11 to 1 for conviction on all counts. Superior Court Judge William L. Todd Jr. declares a mistrial.

Aug. 20, 1985: Opening arguments begin in the retrial.

Oct. 9, 1985: Hedgecock is convicted on 13 felony conspiracy and perjury counts.

Oct. 15, 1985: A lawyer representing one of the jurors delivers to Hedgecock attorney Oscar Goodman and Dist. Atty. Edwin Miller a letter detailing a series of alleged incidents in which bailiff Al Burroughs Jr. purportedly talked with jurors about the case in violation of court rules.

Dec. 10, 1985: Hedgecock resigns as mayor and is sentenced to one year in jail.

Aug. 19, 1988: The California Supreme Court agrees to review Hedgecock’s conviction.

June 12, 1990: The California Supreme Court listens to Hedgecock lawyer Charles Sevilla argue that his client was deprived of a fair trial because of judge’s errors and jury tampering by a court bailiff.

Sept. 6, 1990: By a 5-2 vote, the California Supreme Court reversed 12 perjury convictions because of faulty jury instructions by Todd.

Nov. 15, 1990: Hedgecock accepted his conviction on a single felony in return for no jail sentence and no retrial.