Advertisement

Judge Leans Toward Ban of Gatherings by 18th Street Gang

TIMES STAFF WRITERS

In what would be a precedent-setting ruling for Los Angeles, a Superior Court judge Wednesday signaled that he is likely to grant an injunction banning virtually all public gatherings by members of the notorious 18th Street gang, accused of terrorizing a neighborhood in the southwest area of the city.

The proposed injunction names 18 members of one branch of the sprawling, violent gang and marks the city’s first attempt to use a civil lawsuit to bar more than two identified members of the gang from standing, sitting, walking, driving or appearing anywhere in public together.

Judge Alan G. Buckner, in a “statement of decision,” said the city’s request for an injunction against the alleged 18th Streeters was well-founded in the law. “The court will not hesitate to issue an injunction,” the judge said. He added that the only remaining issue to be decided is whether all those named in the proposed injunction are, in fact, gang members. Another hearing has been set for July.

Advertisement

Buckner also suggested during the hearing that the city could impose the proposed injunction’s sweeping restriction on 18th Street gang members not specifically named in the complaint but who enter the targeted area, where prosecutors say 18th Streeters have brought crime and terror to residents.

The hearing is the first of its kind in Los Angeles since a January state Supreme Court decision that broadly upheld civil injunctions as a tool that cities may use to combat gang activity. For the most part, these injunctions have helped restore a sense of security to many gang-plagued neighborhoods, according to residents and police.

The Orange County city of Westminster won a similar injunction in 1993, banning 59 members of the West Trece gang from a 25-square-block neighborhood. Specifically, the gang members were barred from “standing, sitting, walking, driving, gathering or appearing anywhere in public view” within the 25-block area.

Advertisement

That injunction was overturned as unconstitutional by Superior Court Judge Richard J. Beacon, who called it an “impermissible invasion of privacy.” The Orange County district attorney’s office has appealed that ruling.

Unlike previous anti-gang injunctions in the Los Angeles area--which banned gang members from using cellular phones, beepers or loitering--the injunction now being sought would prevent more than two of the 18 individuals named so far from associating in public view at any one time, including on the private property of one of the alleged 18th Street members.

Under the proposed order, juvenile gang members in the targeted area could not be in public between 8 p.m. and sunrise unless they could prove that they were traveling to school or work. The order would prohibit gang members from acting as lookouts, whistling or using walkie-talkies or flashlights to warn that police are approaching.

Advertisement

Assistant City Atty. Martin Vranicar Jr., the city’s top gang prosecutor, described the breadth of the injunction as unprecedented in Los Angeles. “As far as we’re concerned,” he said, “this is [pushing] the envelope.”

A lawyer for four of the defendants, along with some civil libertarians, say the measure’s provisions run the risk of wholesale civil rights violations and are too vague in defining gang membership. Nonetheless, the lawyer conceded after the hearing that his arguments had apparently failed to sway the judge.

“I think the court has made it rather clear that [it] is deciding in favor of the injunction,” said attorney Sean Ward, whose clients deny that they are gang members.

Authorities say the injunction is necessary because the 18th Street clique at the heart of the case is among the gang’s most violent and has thrived despite more conventional crime-fighting efforts--including a two-year undercover joint task force by the FBI and the Los Angeles Police Department.

“Traditional police efforts [in the area] have been extraordinary, dedicated and nonstop,” said Deputy City Atty. Jule A. Bishop, one of the prosecutors arguing the case. “[But] it never changed the behavior of the gang. If anything, they came back more bold.”

The same has been true in communities dominated by 18th Street across Southern California. With an estimated membership of up to 20,000, 18th Street is considered the region’s largest and one of its most lethal gangs, engaged in narcotics sales, street extortion, robbery and murder. Unlike most gangs that have sprung from Los Angeles, the nation’s gang capital, 18th Street cells have reached across ethnic lines and municipal borders, posing unique challenges for law enforcement.

Advertisement

The city’s crackdown on 18th Street follows a series in The Times late last year chronicling the gang’s rise. Prosecutors say their proposed injunction, targeting an area west of La Brea Avenue and south of Adams Boulevard, is only the first of others that may be sought against 18th Street elsewhere.

The area initially set for enforcement has been a hotbed of shootings, gang warfare and brazen narcotics sales, authorities contend.

At Wednesday’s packed hearing, most of the defendants had no legal representation. In all, 14 reputed gang members--three of them in custody--appeared before the court.

As Buckner gave a lengthy discourse on legal and philosophical points, a number of the defendants--some with gang tattoos on their shaven heads--yawned, laughed and seemed to pay little attention.

The judge on several occasions admonished the defendants to respect the proceedings and remain quiet or face incarceration. He also took them to task for flashing gang signs at an earlier hearing.

“Gentlemen, whatever else you do, don’t ever flash any gang signs in this court again,” Buckner said, adding later: “If there’s another disturbance in this courtroom, someone is not going to go home this afternoon.”

Advertisement

The four defendants represented by Ward tried to mount an unusually spirited challenge to the city’s case. They filed more than 140 affidavits from neighbors, relatives and co-workers supporting their denials of gang membership and indicating that they hold full-time jobs or attend school regularly.

Some residents declared that they did not feel threatened by the four defendants, including Efrain “Woody” Moreno. Prosecutors and police maintain that Moreno is a “major player” in the targeted 18th Street clique and that he allows “the use of his properties as a safe haven for the gang.”

Moreover, the four defendants represented by Ward alleged that LAPD anti-gang officers have “unclean hands” because they have sought to provoke violence between 18th Street and its enemies. Gang members are sometimes dropped off in enemy territory by officers and taunted to strike against rivals, according to declarations filed on behalf of the defendants.

Buckner, however, made it clear that the affidavits were contradictory and, at best, unpersuasive.

After the hearing, Moreno insisted that he has never been a gang member--a contention disputed by authorities. He said he has never been arrested, has no tattoos and works up to 60 hours a week, in addition to maintaining three properties that he owns.

“I spend very little time with any friends,” Moreno said.

Despite the expanded powers that cities can now exercise under the Supreme Court ruling, even law enforcement officials are debating the effectiveness of gang injunctions. Some anti-gang officers say injunctions can turn the community against police if not carefully implemented and may only drive gang activity to another area.

Advertisement

“What often happens is they [police] implement these things and then leave it to patrol to enforce,” said one veteran anti-gang investigator. “They have no idea who the 18th Streeters are, so they have to stop people and check. . . . It makes enemies of those people who might not have been sympathetic to that [gang].”

Times staff writer Scott Martelle contributed to this report.

Advertisement