One Man’s Battle With ‘3 Strikes’

East Walnut Street in Pasadena is a long way from the downtown nerve center of Los Angeles County’s criminal justice system. And 36-year-old Louis Francis, a three-time convicted robber, is neither a celebrity who draws television cameras nor a poster boy of the civil liberties crowd.

But when he arrived in Department J of Pasadena’s Superior Court on Thursday morning, mounting a prickly defense on his own behalf, the case of the People vs. Francis offered both theater and consequence. And his 30-minute appearance was in equal measure a circus and a lesson in democracy.

For Francis is acting as his own attorney in a “three strikes” prosecution that could give him 25 years to life--his longest sentence by far--for a $195 burglary and theft last year in Arcadia. And his quarrel is not so much with the law, but how it is being applied.

Relying as much on news clippings as legal precedent, Frances is trying to avoid prison by citing studies that conclude that the “three strikes” law has been unfairly applied to African Americans such as himself. He also has argued that the district attorney’s office should be disqualified from prosecuting him because it showed its bias when prosecutors reduced “three strikes” charges against the grandson of a contributor to Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti.

Not surprisingly, Francis’ arguments during his pretrial motions Thursday were deemed frivolous by the prosecution and irrelevant by Judge Jack B. Tso, who set a trial to begin next Wednesday.

But they did draw attention. Among the small courtroom audience were not only the prosecutor assigned to the case but the head of the district attorney’s Pasadena office and a representative of the state attorney general’s office. And in a letter to the court, the San Francisco organization that has criticized “three strikes” for its incarceration rate of blacks asked for a continuance so it could consider Francis’ case.

From the moment he entered Department J, wearing county jailhouse blues and carrying a stack of law books and legal pads, Francis’ appearance alternately rattled--and amused--the courtroom.

Peering down from the bench, an often exasperated Judge Tso noted that he already had received nearly 100 motions filed by the defendant. And Thursday he tried, in vain, to wade quickly through the remaining issues raised by Francis, who faces four felony counts arising from a burglary-forgery involving an Arcadia businessman.

But the defendant often interrupted the judge in mid-sentence, pressing the claim that his right to a fair trial had been compromised by the “three strikes” law’s application and the district attorney’s practices.

First, Francis cited a recent study by the Center for Juvenile and Criminal Justice in San Francisco. Several weeks ago, the center released a report saying that the 2-year-old “three strikes and you’re out” law has resulted in an imprisonment rate for African Americans that is more than 13 times that of whites. And after the enterprising defendant asked the center to testify on his behalf, center officials sent a letter to the court saying they would like to consider that request.

Then, the defendant mentioned one district attorney’s case that has emerged as a campaign issue for Garcetti--the office’s decision to reduce “three strikes” charges for the grandson of a man who contributed about $13,000 to Garcetti in 1992. That decision meant that the suspect, twice convicted of robbery before a “third strike” charge of attempted arson was reduced to attempted vandalism, received 16 months in prison, not life behind bars.

“I’m contending that because I’m not in a position to donate a substantial amount of funding to [Garcetti’s] campaign for election . . . I’m not going to receive” a fair trial, Francis told the court.

Reading from newspaper clippings, Francis quoted prosecutors who had criticized the office’s handling of the contributor’s grandson. Francis sought to call those prosecutors as witnesses. But the judge quashed the subpoenas.

Larry Trapp, head deputy of the district attorney’s Pasadena office, said he and someone from the state attorney general’s office always attend hearings where there is a motion to disqualify the district attorney from the case.

During the pretrial hearing, Francis’ attempts to prove the relevance of certain evidence were often delayed by his own inexperience with the law. Several times, he drew admonishments from the judge as he thumbed through law books or asked the judge for time to explain his position.

At one point, the judge even voiced frustration over illegible handwritten motions filed by the suspected forger.

After the judge set a trial date, Francis was returned to County Jail, where he has been held since his arrest last May.

“To sum it up, I feel harmed,” he said hours later by phone from the jail. “Even though I believed it would be hard to get that motion [to disqualify the district attorney’s office] . . . the court seems to be aiding the problem.”

As such, Francis said, he would follow up on his courtroom pledge to file a motion with the state Court of Appeal to remove Tso from the case.

That might be one motion Tso would not challenge.

“In a way, I favor it,” the frustrated judge told Francis.