Proposed Fruitvale gang injunction draws protest as court hearing is postponed

By Sean Maher
Oakland Tribune
Posted: 12/02/2010 06:39:07 PM PST
Updated: 12/03/2010 08:15:34 AM PST

Click photo to enlarge

Opponents of the proposed gang injunction by City Attorney of Oakland John Russo, gather at The...
«
1
2
3
4
OAKLAND -- Forty people accused by the city attorney of being dangerous gang members will have to pay almost $1,000 in court fees simply to show up and defend themselves and are not legally entitled to a public defender, an attorney fighting a proposed gang injunction said Thursday.
Oakland City Attorney John Russo announced the injunction request in October, naming 42 people he said were members of the Norteno street gang police say is responsible for half the criminal violence in the area.
Because the injunction is a civil complaint rather than a criminal charge, laws providing defendants with free-of-charge, court-appointed attorneys don't kick in and the defendants are fending for themselves, said civil rights attorney Michael Siegel, who is fighting the injunction.
Siegel said he planned to ask a judge to both waive the defendants' filing fees and ask the state to provide attorneys for all the defendants. Thursday's hearing was delayed until next week but still drew about 40 people outside the Alameda County administration building.
"This is a quasi-criminal case," Siegel said, arguing that because anyone caught violating the injunction could face six months in jail, those people deserve the same legal protection as a criminal defendant. Further, while fee waivers are available, Siegel said the income thresholds tend to be very low, and many defendants are living with their parents in households that won't qualify for a waiver
Advertisement

but don't have any extra income, either.
Russo said in October that he'd be filing his evidence in a week; however, an effort to further flesh out the evidence delayed the process, and a Dec. 17 court date is likely to be postponed, attorneys both for and against the injunction said. The possibility of judicial approval is unlikely until at least January.
Two defendants named in the injunction have been dropped from the list after contacting Russo's office and convincing attorneys they had been mistakenly lumped in with the others, city attorney spokesman Alex Katz said. The rest, Katz said, have clearly shown themselves to be gang members, either by claiming membership themselves or by consistent criminal behavior in concert with gang activities.
Russo has said several times that he agrees with anti-injunction activists that the action is not a cure-all solution and that social services, including after-school programs and drug rehabilitation, are sorely needed in one of the city's most violent neighborhoods if real progress is to be made.
If Russo is able to show "clear and convincing" evidence in civil court that each of the remaining 40 defendants is a member of the gang, they would be disallowed to associate with each other during certain times within a safety zone bordered by 21st Avenue and High Street south of Brookdale Avenue. They would be disallowed to carry large ink markers commonly connected to gang graffiti and several other criminal behaviors.
As attorneys debated several issues in recent weeks, a legal wrinkle presented itself: Siegel's firm, Siegel & Yee, which is representing at least one defendant and has counseled several more, also employs Oakland City Council President Jane Brunner, which Russo's office argues is a conflict of interest.
"The law is pretty clear: it represents a conflict for her and for the firm," Katz said. "The council controls our budget, for one. There's a lot of potential for conflict there. She owes a duty to the city and she owes a duty to her firm as an attorney."
Siegel said Brunner has been totally uninvolved in the firm's work against the injunction, a result of "an internal firewall in the office" the firm put up to address what he acknowledged could be perceived as a conflict of interest.
The case will return to county court at 1 p.m. Wednesday, at which time Siegel said he will plan to make his requests. The injunction will not face the question of approval until a later hearing.
Russo's office has posted online several documents it submitted to the court as evidence. They are at www.oaklandcityattorney.org.