Prop. 115 Ruling May Affect Local Cases : Judiciary: The state Supreme Court decides that trial procedures outlined in the Crime Victims’ Initiative apply to illegal acts committed before it took effect last June.

A California Supreme Court decision issued Monday could affect hundreds of Ventura County criminal cases, including the biggest fraud case in county history and the first assault prosecution in the state of someone allegedly spreading the AIDS virus through sex.

The court ruled that trial procedures outlined in Proposition 115, the Crime Victims’ Initiative, apply to crimes that were committed before the proposition took effect June 6, 1990.

Ventura County prosecutors said the ruling eliminates the need for preliminary hearings for defendants who were already indicted by a Ventura County grand jury.

But defense attorneys said the ruling infringes on defendants’ rights to hear the evidence against them before trial.

Specifically, the court ruled that district attorneys may bring cases predating Proposition 115 to trial through grand jury indictments rather than preliminary hearings. It also ruled that judges, rather than lawyers, may choose jurors to sit on trials of crimes predating the measure.

Ventura County prosecutors hailed the Supreme Court decision as confirmation of voters’ desire for Proposition 115 to streamline the judicial system.

“I think that translates into a direct savings for the system and the taxpayer,” said Assistant Dist. Atty. Colleen Toy White. “People want to see justice done and they want to see it done swiftly, and this is the court saying, ‘Yeah, we agree.’ ”

However, defense attorneys said Monday that Proposition 115 infringes on defendants’ rights.

“It denies the defendant the ability to cross-examine and to confront the witnesses against him and to effectively weed out needless charges,” said Ventura County Public Defender Kenneth I. Clayman. “And it denies the public and the media the right to cast the public glare on those kinds of very important preliminary proceedings.”

Prosecutors say the Supreme Court’s ruling has torpedoed chances of preliminary hearings for assault defendant David Scott Crother, and for fraud defendants Olen B. Phillips, Charles J. Francoeur and Felix Laumann.

Crother, 45, of Santa Barbara was indicted Jan. 11 on 15 counts of assault, one for each of the sexual liaisons that he allegedly had with an unidentified Ventura County woman between September, 1988, and August, 1989.

Prosecutors said Crother knew he had the AIDS virus as early as 1988, yet had sex with the woman repeatedly without telling her about it or without using a condom. The woman and the baby Crother allegedly fathered have tested positive for the AIDS virus, the indictment said.

Crother’s attorney, Robert L. Sanger, asked the court to order a preliminary hearing, arguing that Crother should hear the woman’s testimony.

Ventura County Superior Court Judge Lawrence Storch granted the request, ruling that the closed grand jury proceeding against Crother violated his right to hear evidence against him. Upon appeal by prosecutors, the State 2nd District Court of Appeal upheld Storch’s ruling.

However, prosecutors appealed the latter decision to the Supreme Court, which ordered Crother’s case postponed until it could decide whether court procedures in Proposition 115 should apply to crimes committed before June 5, 1990.

Sanger called the ruling “a real tragedy for the law of the state of California.”

“When you have a grand jury indictment, a defendant does not have an opportunity to present any kind of a legal defense,” Sanger said. “The district attorney has complete control over the grand jury room.”

Assistant Chief Deputy Dist. Atty. Kevin J. McGee said the Supreme Court probably will return the Crother case to the 2nd District Court of Appeal for further review.

White said the court’s ruling will save the courts time and money in pursuing charges of conspiracy and fraud against Phillips, Francoeur and Laumann.

“If we had to go through a post-indictment prelim, it would take weeks to do the same thing that’s already been done in front of the grand jury,” White said. “It’s great news.”

The three men were arrested in early February after an 81-count indictment accused them of conspiracy, grand theft and securities fraud.

Investigators said about 2,000 investors stand to lose as much as $30 million invested with Phillips’ company, the Phillips Financial Group of Agoura Hills. They said the defendants sold limited partnerships in various properties and then encumbered the properties with numerous trust deeds that far exceeded the value of the properties.

On Monday, the defendants’ attorneys seemed resigned to the likelihood that the massive fraud case will go to trial without a preliminary hearing.

“If it’s a fruitless endeavor, it’s a fruitless endeavor,” said Steven D. Powell, who represents Phillips. “If it’s so, it’s just a matter of racking 12 in the box, pick a jury and go.”

“Aw, shucks,” said Laumann’s attorney, Deputy Public Defender John Voigtsberger, upon learning of the ruling. “Basically, what we have now is a set-piece legal proceeding before the grand jury, rather than a proceeding where both sides were represented. I think it’s going to make it more difficult for my client to get a fair trial.”

Times staff writer Philip Hager contributed to this story.