Poll Finds Wide Legal Ignorance : Justice system: Nearly half think defendants must prove their innocence. Officials of the State Bar, which sponsored the survey, decry the results and plan an education program.

Most Californians cannot describe the Bill of Rights, nearly half wrongly believe criminal defendants must prove their innocence and a vast majority do not know their potential liability for lost credit cards, a pioneering “legal literacy” test revealed Wednesday.

But those who were questioned knew well the blood-alcohol standard for drunk driving, that both mothers and fathers have a legal duty to support their children and that employers may require job applicants to take drug tests.

The survey, conducted for the State Bar of California, sought for the first time in the nation to measure the basic legal knowledge of the adult population. The results, released as part of the observance of Law Day, caused concern and even alarm among leaders of the legal profession.

“Clearly, we have a long way to go in educating our citizens about their fundamental rights and responsibilities,” said State Bar President Charles S. Vogel of Los Angeles. “The belief that a person charged with a crime has to prove his innocence is absolutely astonishing.”

The Bar’s vice president, Robert H. Oliver of Fresno, said he found the results “disturbing and truly disappointing.” He called the survey “a warning to all of us that the foundation of our system of justice is in danger of being eroded by public misunderstanding.”

In the survey, 440 adults throughout California were questioned in March about 14 areas of law, ranging from constitutional rights and criminal procedure to consumer protection and divorce proceedings. On the average, respondents answered 58% of the questions correctly--a grade of C-minus by the standard of survey analysts.

While the results were generally consistent by race, sex and geography, there were some differences. For example, more Asians than any other ethnic group--62%--properly identified the Bill of Rights as the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. Of whites who were surveyed, 49% knew the source of the Bill of Rights.

Those with college educations performed only slightly better (68% correct answers) than those with high school educations (55%).

No respondent answered all 24 questions correctly. The high was 23 right answers; the low was four. Asked how they would learn more about law, 45% said they would watch educational television programs; 40% said they would read newspapers; 39% said they would read free pamphlets.

The survey was conducted for the Bar by CommSciences, a Los Angeles- and Toronto-based communications research company. Its cost of $16,000 was funded by lawyers’ contributions to the State Bar Foundation.

The poll, subject to a 5% margin of error, showed that:

* 53% of those surveyed were unable to describe the Bill of Rights, the provisions that were added to the Constitution 200 years ago to guarantee such basic liberties as freedom of speech, press, religion and assembly, protection against unreasonable searches, and the right to trial by jury.

* 48% did not know that at trial, a defendant is presumed innocent and it is up to the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

* 68% were unaware that if credit card holders lose a card and fail to notify the company, they will have to pay no more than $50 for any subsequent unauthorized purchases.

* 55% did not understand that unwritten or oral contracts may be binding and enforceable under law.

Legal knowledge proved somewhat broader in other areas. For example, 95% knew that motorists with a .08 or higher blood-alcohol level can be convicted of drunk driving; 95% knew that both parents may be held liable for child support; 90% knew that husbands may be prosecuted for raping their wives, and 66% answered correctly that job applicants may be required to submit to drug tests.

Vogel, the Bar president, noted that ignorance of law can pose a wide assortment of practical difficulties. Holders of lost credit cards might end up paying more than required by law, he pointed out. Or day laborers, working under an oral agreement, could be cheated out of wages by an unscrupulous employer, he said.

TEST YOUR LEGAL KNOWLEDGE

True of False

1. If you are sued for damaging someone else’s property, and you cannot afford to hire a lawyer, the court must appoint and pay for a lawyer to defend you.

2. In California, if you drive with a blood alcohol level of .08% or higher you are guilty of drunk driving--no matter how well you were driving at the time you were arrested.

3. If you lose a credit card and do not notify your credit card company, the most you will have to pay is $50 for any purchases you did not make.

4. If you resist arrest by a police officer, you have committed a crime even if you are innocent of any wrongdoing.

5. If you fail to pay rent, your landlord can turn off your heat or change your locks.

Multiple Choice

6. Which of the following statements best describes the Bill of Rights: a) A message of rebellion from the founding fathers to the British king. b) The introduction to the Constitution. c) Any bill involving personal rights that Congress passes. d) The first 10 amendments to the Constitution.

Answers: 1--False. 2--True. 3--True. 4--True. 5--False. 6--d.

Source: State Bar of California’s legal literacy survey