Judge Subject of Civil Rights Investigation : Law: Federal agency is reviewing complaints that Claude E. Whitney coerced guilty pleas from poor in Municipal Court. He denies allegations.

A federal civil rights agency is reviewing allegations that a county Municipal Court judge routinely denied indigent defendants their constitutional rights, including representation by an attorney, a top official revealed Monday.

Philip Montez, director of the Western regional office of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, said his office began looking into the allegations against Municipal Judge Claude E. Whitney a few months ago, after a casual complaint to the head of the agency’s California advisory committee.

“I was asked to look at this when I had the time and I made time,” said Montez, who declined to discuss the review in detail but described the allegations as “serious.” Montez said the accusations could become the starting point for a wider exploration of criminal justice issues in Orange County and elsewhere, from police-community relations to the overall workings of the judicial system.

“If that is going on in that jurisdiction, there are things going on elsewhere,” Montez said. “Everyone is entitled to civil rights and it might be time to review that across the board, because it may lead to identification of justice problems.”

The Orange County public defender’s office filed a formal complaint with the state Commission on Judicial Performance in January, alleging that misdemeanor defendants have been denied their constitutional rights when appearing in one of the county’s busiest municipal courts.

The complaint alleges that as a misdemeanor arraignment judge in Municipal Court in Santa Ana, Whitney was more interested in clearing courtroom dockets than protecting a defendant’s legal rights.

Among other things, the public defender’s office has accused Whitney of coercing an extraordinary number of guilty pleas from poor defendants by routinely ordering those requesting attorneys back to jail for a week, until lawyers could be found for them.

According to the complaint, violations also included restricting defendants’ access to bail hearings and translators. The complaint also claims Whitney mistakenly handed down sentences that were improperly severe--all with the knowledge of Presiding Municipal Judge James M. Brooks in Santa Ana, who allegedly was interested in maintaining a high rate of guilty pleas from the poor.

The judges have steadfastly denied any wrongdoing and predict a review will be fruitless.

“They’re welcome to look, probe all they like, but they won’t find anything wrong,” Brooks said Monday. “We haven’t trampled on anyone’s civil rights. There is no little Watergate here. This is basically the result of, if you will, a (dispute) between the court and the (public defender’s) office and that has been settled.”

In an 11-point, written agreement between Brooks and the public defender’s office that was signed before the complaint to the state Commission on Judicial Performance, Brooks affirmed the rights that judges must provide defendants.

Whitney has changed assignments as part of a routine rotation. His attorney, Ron Brower, said the judge will be happy to cooperate in any way.

“Anything they want, they can have, but we think it will ultimately prove what we’ve been saying all along--he’s committed no violation of civil rights,” Brower said.

Los Angeles attorney Michael Carney, chairman of the state advisory committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, said Monday that he informed Montez of the complaints several months ago after an attorney told him about alleged problems in the Municipal Court.

“He indicated to me there were rather serious irregularities going on and my first reaction was, ‘You’re kidding me,’ ” Carney said, adding that after learning more he contacted Montez.

Carney, who said he will recommend that the advisory committee hold a public hearing on the issue, stressed that a decision to review a complaint does not mean it is valid.

“We are not a head-hunting organization. We’re not out to crucify anyone,” he said. “Our job is to conduct a fact-finding forum, nothing more.”

Montez said he has gathered background information regarding the complaint and has held meetings with people he declined to identify. He said he plans to discuss the issue with the state advisory committee, which has the authority to hold a public hearing and ultimately advise the federal civil rights commission on what, if any, action to take.

The commission, in turn, can refer apparent violations to federal agencies, such as the U.S. Justice Department, for investigation and enforcement if needed.

The controversy began in November when the county public defender’s office sought a court order to halt alleged the violations.

Brooks said defendants who pleaded guilty before Whitney were offered the chance to withdraw their guilty pleas, but so far none has done so. Some, however, have sought modifications of their sentences.

“If it were true, they’d be lined up outside the door,” Brooks said. “Not a single person has come forward to withdraw a guilty plea.”

The investigation by the state judicial commission is ongoing. Commission officials could not be reached for comment Monday.

County Public Defender Ronald Y. Butler declined to comment on the complaint because it is still under investigation.

A separate investigation by the the Orange County Bar Assn., which concluded in April, produced similar allegations and recommended several corrective measures, including giving defendants access to attorneys on the day of arraignment.