Most Defendants in Curfew Cases Take Settlements : Courts: Many pleading guilty in San Fernando and Van Nuys are sentenced to Caltrans cleanup crews.

Prompted by offers of sentences lighter than those routinely imposed immediately after the riots, most defendants accused of violating curfew in the San Fernando Valley are accepting settlements rather than fighting their cases in court.

Of nearly 300 people processed for curfew violations this week in both the San Fernando and Van Nuys courthouses, less than 60 have asked for trials.

Many who have pleaded guilty to violating the curfew have received 10 to 15 days working on Caltrans cleanup crews, contrasted with the 10-day jail terms handed down almost automatically by judges days after the riots.

The imposition of Caltrans duty mirrors a trend in courthouses elsewhere in Los Angeles, where curfew violators are avoiding jail time by agreeing to the road work or paying fines. Judges were reluctant to discuss their reasons for imposing the lighter sentences, but prosecutors and public defenders say most judges indicated that, with public order now restored, there was little motivation to keep suspected offenders off the streets.

Others suggest that the glare of the media spotlight has dimmed, allowing the court system to return to its regular practices.

“It’s a luck of the draw,” said Bill Weiss, head of the San Fernando bureau of the public defender’s office. “There are no more TV camera lights, and no one has to worry about looking like they are tough on crime. I still think the sentences are too harsh. I wish more people would fight it in court, but I guess they just want to get it over with.”

But the resolution of felony cases in the Valley and downtown courthouses differs. Whereas only 6% of felony cases downtown have ended in guilty or no-contest pleas, many defendants in the Valley are accepting offers from prosecutors.

Of the 48 felony cases filed in Van Nuys, about 35 have been settled with defendants entering no-contest pleas to commercial burglary or receiving stolen property, according to Deputy Dist. Atty. Herbert R. Lapin. Sentences have ranged from a year in County Jail to 16 months in prison, less than what defendants would have risked if they had gone to trial and been found guilty, he said.

Ten felony cases are scheduled for trial and the defendants remain in custody in lieu of $10,000 bail, according to prosecutors. Three other felony cases in Van Nuys were dismissed for lack of evidence.

In San Fernando, Deputy Dist. Atty. Ken Barshop said he did not have a precise breakdown on the disposition of the 28 looting cases filed there. He said, however, that he expected less than half to go to trial, with only two or three cases being dropped for lack of evidence.

Unlike cases in the downtown court, where many are being dismissed for lack of evidence, only a handful of prosecutions are falling apart in the Valley.

The mass arrests that occurred from Hollywood to South Los Angeles created problems for police, who sometimes were unable to match suspected looters with victims who could testify in court. In the Valley, there were few mass arrests, allowing police to gather enough evidence for prosecutions.

Before this week, nearly 300 suspected curfew violators who were in custody in the Valley accepted 10-day jail sentences. Public defenders said these suspected curfew violators had little choice. If they were unable to post $8,000 bail--and few could--fighting the charges would have meant staying in jail at least 30 days until the cases could be heard.

But this week, the courts adopted a more lenient policy.

Although numbers on this week’s curfew cases are not yet complete, of about 180 people charged with violating curfew who were processed in San Fernando Municipal Court, about 140 pleaded no contest. Most were sentenced to 10 days working on Caltrans cleanup crews, though a few were given 30-day details.

Only about 40 people asked for trials to fight their cases.

Deputy City Atty. David Kanokey, who supervises the San Fernando bureau, said his office was still seeking sentences of 30 to 90 days in jail, although judges were often reluctant to impose them.

But Kanokey was not entirely disappointed that curfew violators would be spending 10 or more days picking up garbage along highways.

He said most people end up serving only four or five days of a 10-day jail sentence, while the Caltrans work could be considered more onerous because it’s “eight hours a day of hard work.”

In Van Nuys, less than 20 people of about 120 curfew cases decided to go on trial. Municipal Judge Alan E. Ellis handed out 15-day sentences of working with Caltrans crews for the more serious curfew violators. Less serious offenders had the option of 100 hours of community service or a $300 fine that, when penalties are assessed, actually is closer to $1,000.

Another dozen or so people in Van Nuys were sentenced to time they had already served, which ranged from one to three days in jail.

Harsher penalties, however, may be in store for suspected curfew violators who have disappeared.

Bench warrants were issued from both courthouses for nearly 150 people who failed to show up for their arraignments on curfew charges this week. Ellis said if people appear within the next week or so--and they have a good excuse for missing their court dates--they would not be expected to face additional penalties.

“On the other hand,” Ellis said, “if the bench warrant remains outstanding for a couple of months, and the person gets picked up, the person is likely to do some time in jail.”

* RELATED STORY: A1