Judge Will Weigh Many Factors in Sentencing : Courts: He must consider complex guidelines. Many observers think the jurist will work toward a mid-level term of four years for Damian Williams.

Damian Monroe Williams, the lead defendant in the Reginald O. Denny beating trial, could be sentenced to a maximum of 10 years for the 1992 riot-related crimes he was convicted of Monday, but a shorter term of four or eight years is considered most likely by legal experts.

Williams was convicted of committing mayhem against truck driver Denny on April 29, 1992, in the most celebrated incident of the rioting that began after the not guilty verdicts in the Simi Valley trial of four Los Angeles police officers accused of beating Rodney G. King. The maximum sentence for this crime is eight years.

Williams also was convicted of four misdemeanor assaults on other people at Florence and Normandie avenues, a riot flash point. The maximum sentence for each of these crimes is six months. So if Judge John W. Ouderkirk imposed the maximum term on all the convictions and determined that they should run consecutively, Williams could get a total of 10 years.

But Los Angeles lawyer Mark Overland, a sentencing expert, said that because misdemeanor convictions are usually served in County Jail, it would be quite unusual to add them on to a felony conviction for mayhem, which would be served in state prison.

“The usual procedure is to make the misdemeanor term concurrent,” meaning that it would be served at the same time as the felony conviction, Overland said.

Under state law, Ouderkirk has the discretion to give Williams a two-, four- or eight-year term on the mayhem conviction. Whatever choice he makes is likely to be controversial, just as was U.S. District Judge John G. Davies’ decision to sentence Sgt. Stacey C. Koon and Officer Laurence M. Powell to 30-month prison terms after they were found guilty of violating King’s civil rights in a federal trial earlier this year. Davies departed substantially from federal sentencing guidelines, which he said called for a term in the six- to seven-year range. No matter what Ouderkirk decides, it seems inevitable that some members of the community will think he was either too lenient or too punitive.

As a general rule, people convicted of crimes in California serve about half of their sentences. They also are given credit and a half for time served in custody while awaiting trial. Because Williams has been in jail 17 months, he would get about 25 months credit, Overland said.

The maximum sentence that co-defendant Henry Keith Watson could receive for his misdemeanor assault conviction is six months. Although Watson has also spent 17 months in jail while the charges against him were pending, it is unclear when he might be released because he was on probation when he committed the assault on Denny.

Additional convictions are possible because the 10-woman, two-man jury will continue deliberations today on one charge against Williams and one against Watson.

California’s sentencing system is complex but allows a judge considerable discretion within certain ranges, said Myrna Raeder, a Southwestern University criminal law professor.

Under the state’s determinate sentencing law, there is a low, medium and high range for felony convictions. California law provides that the judge is to impose the mid-level term unless he provides reasons for meting out the lower or higher term.

As an aid to the judge, Los Angeles County Superior Court rules provide a lengthy list of aggravating circumstances that could be cited as a rationale for imposing a higher term and a lengthy list of mitigating circumstances that could be cited as reasons for rendering a lower term.

In arguing for the higher eight-year term for Williams’ mayhem conviction, prosecutors could cite several aggravating factors. Among them: Williams threw a brick at Denny from close range; Denny was “particularly vulnerable”; Denny suffered serious injuries and would have died within minutes if not rescued by four good Samaritans. Prosecutors could also contend that Williams had a “position of leadership” in the commission of the crime.

Another circumstance that could be considered an aggravating factor is Williams’ history. Although Williams has no adult criminal convictions, the prosecutors could cite his prior juvenile arrests for battery, robbery and hit-and-run.

On the other hand, Williams’ lawyer, Edi M.O. Faal, could argue for the lower two-year term. As a possible mitigating factor, Raeder said Faal could contend that “the crime was committed because of an unusual circumstance, such as great provocation, which is unlikely to recur”--again the outbreak of rioting stemming from the Simi Valley verdicts. Raeder acknowledged that this Superior Court rules section normally is used when the victim of the crime provoked an attack and said there is no evidence that Denny did any such thing.

Several legal experts, including Raeder, said they thought it was unlikely that Ouderkirk would give Williams the two-year term, considering the circumstances of the attack on Denny.

But the experts said Ouderkirk could justify giving Williams either the mid-term of four years or the high term of eight years.

“The two most important factors for the judge are the defendant’s prior criminal record, if any, and the nature of the assault,” Loyola University law professor Laurie Levenson said. “Was the assault particularly heinous? Particularly violent?”

Los Angeles criminal lawyer Barry Tarlow said he thought that prosecutors have a strong argument for the eight-year term.

“However, I think that there is an overriding factor that ought to enter into the sentencing in this case--the need to heal the community and to put the troubling problems associated with the King beating and the riots behind us,” Tarlow said. “Justice ought to be determined by a thoughtful, fair approach by the judge, not by a mechanistic adherence to formulas.”

Raeder also said the mid-range term was appropriate, noting that Denny hugged Williams’ mother during the trial. “His forgiveness, which I thought was absolutely magnanimous, gives us a lesson as a community.”

In theory, Overland said, there is nothing in state law that prevents Ouderkirk from giving Williams a sentence of probation. But he and other experts said a probationary sentence was highly unlikely given the nature of the crime.