Conviction for Robbery, Attempted Rape Overturned : Courts: Justices find the defense lawyer incompetent. The accused, a 65-year-old Newport yacht broker, had already served nine months.

A Newport Beach yacht broker who served a sentence for robbery, sexual battery and attempted rape won a persistent battle to clear his name when an appellate court overturned his convictions.

The U.S. 4th District Court of Appeal ruled 2 to 1 last week that Daniel DeHaven’s convictions should be reversed because his attorney was incompetent.

DeHaven, 65, was accused of robbing and attacking a 25-year woman at knifepoint on Jan. 5, 1988, as she sat in her 1978 BMW 320i in the dimly lighted parking garage of a Newport Beach apartment complex.

DeHaven was convicted largely on the strength of the victim’s emotional testimony that he was the man who attacked her. DeHaven has maintained that the victim mistakenly identified him. He said he was at a business lunch with two other men at the time of the incident.

In his appeal, DeHaven argued that there was not enough evidence to convict him and that his attorney should have called character witnesses to testify on his behalf.

Although the appellate court ruled that “the evidence was sufficient” to warrant a guilty verdict, “it was far from overwhelming,” wrote Justice Edward J. Wallin in the majority opinion. The court, however, agreed that DeHaven’s attorney was incompetent in not calling character witnesses to testify.

“The character evidence was capable of raising a reasonable doubt by itself. Its absence undermines our confidence in the verdict,” Wallin wrote.

In a hotly worded dissent, Justice Sheila P. Sonenshine said that she was “loathe to reverse (the trial court’s) decision.”

Sonenshine said that the defense attorney’s decision not to call character witnesses was “sound” because the prosecutor might have then been allowed to introduce other evidence to impeach DeHaven’s character, including an alleged confrontation between him and a female dock attendant and an allegation of embezzlement from a former employer.

Neither accusation has been proven, DeHaven’s appellate attorney, Lawrence Salisbury, said.

With the ruling, DeHaven’s case will be sent back to the Orange County district attorney’s office, which will decide whether to retry the charges. The prosecutor for the case could not be reached for comment.

DeHaven, who spent about nine months in jail for the crimes before being released, declined to comment on the court’s action, pending the district attorney’s decision.

After his conviction, DeHaven was joined by family, friends and an investigator with the county public defender’s office, who believed in his innocence, in his efforts for vindication.

DeHaven and Investigator John K. Depko said they were convinced that the conviction came about partly because Newport Beach Police Department detectives diverged from their own policies and investigative techniques in making the case.

As DeHaven’s appeal moved through the court system, Depko compiled an extensive report on apparent discrepancies and faulty police work, including improper influencing of the victim, that occurred during the investigation. Depko sent his findings to the district attorney’s office, asking for an investigation into the Police Department’s handling of the case.

The Police Department admitted that errors were made in handling evidence, which resulted in the disciplining of an officer. But a spokesman at the department has steadfastly denied that there was any wrongdoing and said that the investigation was conducted properly.

After reviewing the report, the district attorney concluded that there was no evidence to warrant an investigation.