Hedgecock, D.A. Forge Deal to End Long Case

After two trials and more than 6 1/2 years of litigation, former Mayor Roger Hedgecock’s political corruption case ended abruptly Thursday with Hedgecock accepting his conviction on a single felony count in return for no jail sentence and no retrial.

Hedgecock agreed not to appeal a felony conspiracy count stemming from illegal campaign contributions to his 1983 mayoral race, but under terms negotiated with the San Diego County district attorney’s office, that count will be reduced to a misdemeanor early next year. Prosecutors also agreed not to retry Hedgecock on 12 felony perjury counts that he had been convicted of in 1985 but that were overturned by the state Supreme Court last summer.

Under the settlement agreement signed before Superior Court Judge Jesus Rodriguez, Hedgecock will file for outright dismissal of the remaining charge after his three-year probation ends in about 1 1/2 months. Prosecutors will not oppose that request, which, if granted, would leave the former mayor with a clean criminal record.

Hedgecock also agreed to pay a $5,000 fine--five times higher than his original fine--and accepted a one-day jail sentence. He will not have to serve the time because one day’s credit was 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 in jail 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.

And though Hedgecock, now a popular radio talk show host, reiterated Thursday that he does not intend either to practice law or to 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 was delighted to have the case behind him, he also was disappointed over not being vindicated either by being found innocent or by having the charges dismissed.

“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 Jr., meanwhile, emphasized that the settlement enabled prosecutors temporarily, at least, 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.”

After his first case ended in a mistrial in February, 1985, with the jury deadlocked 11 to 1 in favor of conviction, 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 the progress in 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 allegedly 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, including one under age 21, 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.

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