JUDGE CLAMPS DOWN ON PROSECUTOR-AUTHORIZED WIRETAPS.

Byline: Beth Barrett Staff Writer

The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office wiretapped people without the required notification and withheld that information from defendants, but the omissions were not deliberate nor an overt attempt to skirt a court order, Superior Court Judge Larry P. Fidler said in a written ruling Friday.

The order, which clarified an oral ruling earlier in the week, seeks to put to rest a long-simmering dispute in which the Public Defender's Office charged that an unknown number of people was subject to wiretaps without required notification - whether or not charges were ever filed.

Deputy Public Defender Michael Fischman said the ruling - and the court-imposed remedies - have put the District Attorney's Office on notice that wiretaps can never again be hidden from the courts, or from individuals.

``It shows that, in fact, the district attorney's reporting was at best negligent and that they were wrong in their failure to provide the required notice to individuals,'' Fischman said.

Head Deputy District Attorney Robert Schirn said the office for the past couple of years has made all the required notifications of people identified on a wiretap and has done so within the prescribed 90-day period. He said older cases in which notification was withheld have been cleared up.

``I'd be surprised if there are any additional cases or persons to be notified,'' Schirn said.

Still, Fidler said he wants the District Attorney's Office to obtain affidavits from all the agencies that have engaged in wiretapping, including the Los Angeles Police Department, stating a review of cases has been done and that all the appropriate notifications have been made.

Schirn said that in the past, law enforcement officials believed a wiretap didn't have to be disclosed if it only pointed police toward a crime, as long as other information was later obtained independently to make the arrests.

However, in November 1998, Fidler told the District Attorney's Office it had to comply with all inventory and notification requirements. Schirn said the judge was particularly concerned that criminal defendants didn't know their phones had been tapped, and therefore couldn't present a defense to the wiretapping in court.

The Public Defender's Office protested that the order had been violated, particularly in relation to a series of wiretaps of a cellular phone company that resulted in numerous arrests.

Fischman said the judge's requirement that affidavits be produced proving notifications were indeed made is a win for the citizens of Los Angeles.

``Some brakes have been put on unrestricted wiretaps,'' he said.