Political Cases Put D.A. in Spotlight : Prosecutors: Orange County’s Michael R. Capizzi is re-emerging as a force in curbing corruption. But his hard stand on officeholders draws some criticism.

Michael R. Capizzi sits in a shoe box of an office with a crummy view behind a door that bears not his name but the courthouse room number A216, hardly an imposing workplace for the district attorney of the state’s third most populous county.

Much about the cubbyhole he occupies, though, speaks volumes about Capizzi, an inconspicuous and bashful politician who rarely makes headlines and holds news conferences even less.

One of the biggest bits of news to come out of his office in the past year involved a speech to a church group in which he argued against legalizing drug use, hardly a controversial stand for a top law enforcement official to take.

His latest major initiative? Adding a dollar to annual motor vehicle registration fees in Orange County to pay for special prosecutions of car thefts. Not exactly an earthshaker.

But two years into his role as top prosecutor, Capizzi is re-emerging as a preeminent force in an area he knows best: curbing political corruption. The man who made a name for himself in the late 1970s for about 40 corruption convictions is again serving notice that any hint of political misconduct, no matter the level, will not be tolerated.

In recent months, Capizzi’s office has taken on city officials in Brea and Costa Mesa over conflict-of-interest allegations. But it was the abrupt resignation of county Supervisor Don Roth last week during a criminal investigation of alleged influence-peddling that thrust Capizzi into the spotlight.

Undercutting speculation that Roth’s resignation might have been part of a back-room deal to call off the 10-month corruption probe, Capizzi publicly reaffirmed that his investigation is continuing, and raised the possibility of criminal charges against Roth and maybe a jail sentence--if he is convicted. The supervisor’s announcement will have no impact on the investigation, which is expected to be completed in a few weeks, Capizzi said.

Although Capizzi insists that his office had not eased up on political misconduct since the major crackdown in the late 1970s, the most recent investigations suggest a new direction in criminal prosecution that include closer scrutiny of gift-giving and financial disclosures.

In the past, those who violated financial disclosure laws or campaign filing procedures usually had no more to worry about than an occasional fine. But the latest round of investigations has heightened officialdom’s concern over whether something might be viewed as merely a technical violation of the law or a criminal matter.

“For public officials around Orange County--both elected and appointed--there are a lot of antennas going up. You have no idea what you’re supposed to do,” said one public official familiar with the Roth case who did not want to be identified. “I’d say in any other county in the state, this investigation would have been over months ago and Don Roth would still be in office.”

Particularly offensive to those who have been under investigation is the filing of criminal charges in cases that many believe could be handled in civil proceedings by organizations such as the state Fair Political Practices Commission.

“I’m an attorney who does criminal defense work and I am no criminal,” said former Brea Mayor Ronald E. Isles, who pleaded guilty to seven misdemeanor charges related to actions he took as a City Council member between 1989 and 1991. “I’m not a saint. I’m a hard-nosed businessman. But nobody has ever accused me of being dishonest and that’s what a criminal is.”

Isles said he pleaded guilty and paid $13,500 in fines to avoid paying $75,000 in legal fees a trial defense would require.

During their inquiry, district attorney’s investigators were like “Sherman marching through the South,” Isles said, going so far as to suggest to his friends and business associates that they had obtained enough evidence on Isles to send him to jail.

Capizzi said the investigation was handled properly. But others say it is impossible to know exactly what is proper these days, as the threshold of possible criminal conduct seems to be changing.

“The whole point is that there are insufficient guidelines to tell the average politician what to do,” said Michael R. McDonnell, a defense attorney for former Brea City Councilman Wayne D. Wedin, who was acquitted last year of conflict of interest charges. “In Mr. Wedin’s case, they chose to prosecute him for a criminal act and that’s ridiculous.”

Some recent political corruption cases have had less than sterling results.

In 1991, Capizzi’s office charged former Costa Mesa City Councilman Orville Amburgey with conflict of interest violations, but dropped the charges after listening to a tape of a City Council meeting and finding themselves uncertain of whether Amburgey committed a crime.

Last month, prosecutors ended a 2 1/2-year conflict of interest investigation of Brea Councilman Carrey Nelson, concluding that there was no evidence of a crime.

“My family and I have been under a great deal of stress for more than a full year,” Nelson said after the investigation ended.

A jury found Wedin not guilty in December after he was accused of a conflict in urging fellow council members to award a city contract to an engineering company he had worked for.

Capizzi’s prosecutors “can cause all kinds of difficulties for people, and if they cannot sustain those charges, they are not responsible for anything they’ve done,” Wedin said. “It’s clear that things don’t happen in the D.A.’s office without (Capizzi’s) knowledge and approval, so what’s happening is a reflection of his personal style.”

But Capizzi is unfazed by criticism that his office makes much out of little.

It is unfair, he said, to assess the most recent political corruption cases without also considering those he tried in the ‘70s, obtaining convictions of two members of the County Board of Supervisors and a former congressman.

Also often overlooked, he said, is the district attorney’s role in helping federal prosecutors convict W. Patrick Moriarty, who served 29 months in federal prison for political corruption.

Capizzi joined the district attorney’s office in 1964 and, at age 30, became the youngest member of the office management team when he was elevated to an assistant district attorney.

During the 1970s and 1980s, under Dist. Atty. Cecil Hicks, it was clear who handled the grand jury and got indictments returned.

“He was always Mr. Hicks’ out-front guy on political corruption. He has the talent for it, and that was the job he was given,” said John Gier, who worked under Capizzi in the district attorney’s office as a senior investigator.

When it came to political corruption, Gier said, there were never any sacred cows. Capizzi made it clear that he did not want potential violations of state political laws to stay “buried in the bureaucracy” as they had in some counties, he said.

“He just told us: ‘If you’re investigating my mother, let me know, because I might be having dinner with her tonight,’ ” Gier said.

Capizzi rose to chief assistant under Hicks, and when Hicks was appointed a judge, Capizzi ran for his seat in 1990.

Gary Schons, who worked with Capizzi in the 1970s and is now with the state attorney general’s office, said Capizzi has made the office much more professional than it had been under Hicks.

“Mike knows his business,” Schons said. “He’s done a wide array of cases: homicide, political corruption, major dope. And he has a very experienced supervisory staff that appears to be there on merit as opposed to friendship and merit.”

Ask Capizzi about the highlights of his administration and he mentions his contribution to the federal conviction of Charles H. Keating Jr. His investigators played an integral part in the case, he said.

Yet once again, Capizzi got almost no credit and was criticized for not taking on the criminal case himself. Capizzi said the federal government was well along on Keating and his office would only have duplicated efforts.

“I did what was in the best interest of the taxpayers,” he said.

Self-assured about his office, Capizzi said the record speaks for itself.

“Just give me results,” he said. “I know what I’ve done and others have done and I’m happy with myself. I get results.”