GRAFFITI RULING HANDCUFFS COPS.

Byline: Jaxon Van Derbeken Daily News Staff Writer

After admitting that he sprayed his tag name ``TENSE'' on signs and utility boxes from Tujunga to Glendale, it appeared Jason Ramos would be one more success story in the LAPD's crackdown on taggers.

Typically, prosecutors would have filed a felony charge against the Tujunga man, based on evidence that police say includes $10,000 in damage from 40 separate acts of vandalism.

This time, however, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office has told police that it will not file felony charges against the 18-year-old Ramos, instead it will refer the case to the city attorney to bring lesser misdemeanor charges.

The refusal is the result of a recent ruling from the state's 5th District Court of Appeal that police and prosecutors say strips them of a key tool in the fight against graffiti vandals.

The court found that a graffiti vandal suspect cannot be charged with a felony by amassing the losses of several separate acts of vandalism, each of which alone would equal only a misdemeanor based on the damage.

A felony graffiti conviction can lead to prison or probation camp. Misdemeanor charges typically result in no time in custody, police say.

The District Attorney's Office has decided not to fight the ruling, leaving police without the tool that has been the linchpin of the anti-graffiti effort.

``We had analyzed the case, it looked like it was good law,'' said Phil Wynn, head deputy district attorney in San Fernando. ``I think we're going to have to explore new legislation if we are going to maintain this felony level.''

``In the meantime, there is an answer - cases involving multiple victims go to the city attorney,'' he said.

Los Angeles police say the ruling serves to cripple some 80 cases that they have been preparing for prosecution, and it is expected to trigger appeals of as many as 50 felony convictions. It could also hinder felony search warrants to pursue other taggers.

As a result, the state appellate court decision - rendered in January - has forced a virtual cease-fire in the Los Angeles Police Department's war against graffiti vandals in the San Fernando Valley.

``It's pretty devastating because we've done so well and had so much success,'' said Detective Craig Rhudy, head of the 4-year-old LAPD Valley Community Tagger Task Force.

``I'm hoping that the groundswell of public opinion will have an effect on the Legislature, cause the Legislature to fix this problem,'' Rhudy said. ``Otherwise, the community tagger task force ought to shut its doors because we can't do our job.''

For members of the Sylmar Graffiti Busters, the ruling and fallout signals a significant setback in their efforts to stem graffiti in their neighborhoods.

``It's very difficult to prosecute multiple misdemeanors,'' said Tom Weissbarth, president of Sylmar Graffiti Busters. ``This has enabled us to stop some of the highest profile, heaviest damage causing individuals in a cost-effective fashion - this will make it much more expensive to stop vandals.''

Attorneys from the Central California Appellate Program were responsible for arguing the appeals case.

``I think this is a pretty good ruling,'' said Bill Davies, staff attorney at the Central California Appellate Program. Taggers who are juveniles deserve ``the benefit of the doubt, even if there is a graffiti problem in our society,'' he added.

Tell that to the Valley Community Task Force, which in four years has documented $4 million in damage from graffiti and succeeded in bringing felony charges against taggers responsible for more than $1 million in losses.

For a single act of vandalism to qualify as a felony, there must be $5,000 or more worth of damage. What police have done, however, is follow a common law doctrine that allows prosecutors to bring a felony charge by combining losses from several acts of vandalism.

The appellate court heard a case of a graffiti vandal convicted of a felony in Madera County and then ruled that the common law doctrine did not apply.

Los Angeles Assistant City Attorney Martin Vranicar said that he is working on proposed legislation that would circumvent the court ruling, although the Legislature has rejected previous efforts to make graffiti a felony.

``They just couldn't get through the hearing process,'' he said. ``I think one of the problems may have been, we had no appellate case, no horror story to really highlight the problem.''

Rhudy said his task force is not closing its doors.

``We're going to continue with the work, the work is still worthwhile. We'll just wait to get the legislative remedy to start filing felony cases again.''

He said the wait could be until January. ``It's something that needs to be done as quickly as possible. I don't know how to get it done.''