Lungren Rules Prosecutors Can Carry Guns to Offices

Two years ago, a spate of shootings and gun-related threats around Los Angeles County courtrooms hearkened to the days of the Wild West.

In Pomona, the mother of a murder defendant tried to sneak a gun into a courtroom. In Norwalk, two armed officers from different departments got into a beef that arose from a lawsuit. And downtown, a doctor shot and killed his ex-wife inside the civil courthouse as they prepared for a hearing to decide ownership of a car.

The incidents, in almost rapid-fire succession, prompted a security committee of judges to lay down new and tougher policies on courthouse protection. But the rules included a new and controversial prohibition against deputy district attorneys carrying handguns into courthouses, regardless of whether their state permits allowed them to carry concealed weapons.

That policy, which irked many deputy district attorneys and left some feeling in danger, will soon be modified because of a legal opinion handed down by the office of state Atty. Gen. Dan Lungren.

In a six-page decision, Lungren’s office said Monday that the courts cannot bar prosecutors from carrying firearms to and from their offices so long as they have licenses to carry the guns and do not carry them on any floors that have courtrooms. At the downtown courthouse, prosecutors’ offices are on the top floors of the 18-story building.

“It’s basically telling the judges, ‘Look, you can have security but it has to be reasonable,’ ” said well-known defense attorney Harland Braun, who represented a group of deputy district attorneys in opposing the rule.

Added Larry Mason of the Assn. of Deputy District Attorneys: “The association is . . . glad [prosecutors] have been permitted to protect themselves and that they can continue to do so for their own peace of mind and well-being.”

The prohibition, which only applied to an estimated 5% to 10% of the county’s 1,000 deputy district attorneys, nevertheless resonated with many more prosecutors because it was seen as both an arbitrary restriction of their right to protection and a violation of the state law governing weapons.

“You read the statute and it says if you have a weapons permit, you can carry the weapon into any building in the state including the Capitol. Why we were prevented from doing it in a [county] courthouse is a mystery,” said Deputy Dist. Atty. Bill Crisci, who first retained Braun to challenge the policy.

Beyond the legality of the policy, Braun and others said, there is the practical issue of increased jeopardy for prosecutors forbidden to carry weapons into the courthouse.

“It’s an absurd intrusion on the employees,” said prosecutor Herb Lapin, former association president.

“Most of the [prosecutors] who have concealed weapon permits have them because legitimate threats have been made against them,” Lapin said, noting the threats are assessed by law enforcement personnel before permits are issued.

And, Lapin and others said, if a threat were to be carried out against a prosecutor, it would probably be when he or she is most vulnerable--going to and from the office.

Indeed, in a May 1 letter to the attorney general’s office, Braun called it “galling” that the judges would not allow prosecutors to carry guns into the courthouse when they are in greater danger than the judges, who have myriad security measures to protect them.

“It is the prosecutor who is in a much more confrontational position with a defendant than a judge, and it is the prosecutors who must come through the court building through the same public entrances and parking lots used by defendants,” Braun wrote.

“Is it not bizarre that judges who come in to the Criminal Courts Building through a guarded entrance, park in a guarded garage, go to their courts through a private, secured elevator, and preside in a courtroom guarded by an armed bailiff, are afraid of deputy district attorneys who only want to carry their weapons from their cars to their offices, where the weapons will be locked?” Braun added.

Presiding Judge Robert W. Parkin said the recent attorney general’s opinion will prompt a speedy review of the policy, enacted after a security committee proposed new safeguards for the courthouse.

“I can’t say what the bottom line is going to be, but more than likely, the rule will be revised in some fashion to square with the opinion,” said Parkin, who said the matter probably would be considered by authorities within two weeks.

Among the considerations, Parkin added, will be the advice of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, which oversees security for the courthouses.

Sheriff’s Cmdr. Dennis Dahlman said that the security detail for the courts will be able to enforce whatever policy is ultimately adopted by the committee of judges and other authorities who monitor protection at the courthouses.

“Personally, I don’t have a problem with it,” Dahlman said. “But we made a commitment to the judges to enforce whatever policy they consider is appropriate.”