Second-Guessing an Expert Defender? That’s Offensive

What lawyer would you call if you found yourself--guilty or innocent--facing criminal charges? Somewhere on my short list of three or four would be Ronald G. Brower of Santa Ana. I wouldn’t hesitate a second to place my fate in his hands, despite the rather untidy things said about him in the media recently.

One of the unfortunate byproducts of the debate over whether to execute Thomas M. Thompson of Laguna Beach is seeing Brower’s name dragged across some rough terrain, if not right through the mud.

Brower was the trial attorney for Thompson, 42, who on Sunday got an eleventh-hour appellate court reprieve from execution at San Quentin. Thompson was convicted of the 1981 murder of 20-year-old Ginger Fleischli at his Laguna Beach studio apartment.

“Ineptitude” is one of the words I’ve seen bandied about in the media by lawyers and appellate justices critical of Brower’s defense tactics in that case. After 14 years of appeals, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Sunday halted his execution, citing concern Thompson did not receive a fair trial.

Thompson’s current lawyers have essentially argued that Thompson didn’t get a fair trial because Brower made too many strategic mistakes. The 9th Circuit echoed that sentiment, using the phrase “ineffective performance” in describing Brower’s work on the case.

Brower, or any criminal trial lawyer, knows that Monday morning quarterbacking is standard procedure in all murder appeals. That’s why the trial attorney is never assigned by the courts to handle the appeal. The trial attorney knows he or she is about to go under the microscope; it goes with the job. Still, it must rankle Brower to see such comments in print. “Ineffective performance” reminds me of another Brower client who said much the same thing.

He was former Saddleback College assistant dean Donald Dawson, who fatally shot his estranged wife, Donna Mae Dawson, in front of her two-story El Toro home in 1984.

Dawson, who knows his wife is out with her new boyfriend, breaks into her house in the middle of the night to wait for her return. He’s hiding at the top of her stairs, armed with two loaded guns. When she arrives in the morning, he jumps up and opens fire, chasing her out the door and down the sidewalk, both guns blazing. After she’s down from one hit, Dawson then stands above her and ends her life with several more shots. He then waits for the police to arrive.

Dawson was convicted of first-degree murder, but prosecutors came away disappointed. They had accused him of lying-in-wait, which would have qualified him for a life-without-parole sentence. It was a textbook example, the kind legislators had in mind when they created the lying-in-wait statute.

But attorney Brower gained Dawson a chance at a future parole by convincing the jury that the lying-in-wait had come to an end before the shooting started. It was as brilliant a job as I ever heard in a courtroom.

Dawson has never appreciated what a tremendous job Brower did on his behalf. In my years covering criminal courts, I can’t recall a Brower defense where he didn’t hold his own--or better--with the opposing prosecutor.

Maybe the exception was the Thompson case: I confess the trial was too many years ago for me to analyze the nuances of Brower’s defense. The appellate court seemed to believe he should have done more to attack the jailhouse informants used by prosecutors, and that he did a poor job defending Thompson against the rape allegation.

But the turning point in the Thompson trial wasn’t what Brower did; it was what Thompson did. Against his lawyer’s vehement advice, Thompson insisted on testifying. And it was that testimony which nailed him. By concocting a tale about sleeping through a bludgeoning just a few feet away from him, he sealed his own conviction.

Brower might have made mistakes. But one trial should not be a lawyer’s legacy. “Ineffective performance” should not be the tag on Ron Brower’s career. Not with the many cases he has handled with distinction.

Flying Seniors: I don’t buy into the argument that alien beings landed in Roswell, N.M., 50 years ago. But I’m for anybody who finds a good excuse for a party.

Seniors at La Habra Villa will hold a Space Alien Party on Wednesday night to celebrate the anniversary of whatever it was that happened there in 1947. The staff will dress up as the alien visitors.

La Habra Villa is a retirement residence for about 160 seniors on Whittier Boulevard in La Habra. And yes, there really are some believers among them, says Rebecca Herrera, one of the staff people: “Not everybody is old enough to remember that time. Many of our seniors remember it well.”

No More Coasting: Maybe you’ve read about the new Anaheim Ballet. It’s actually the Coast Ballet Theatre of San Clemente with a new name--and a new base. Spokeswoman Barbara McMurray credits Sarah Alevizon, a member of the Anaheim Arts Council, with being instrumental in convincing the 12-year-old ballet troupe to move to Anaheim.

The Arts Council will host a welcoming reception today at 4:30 p.m. at City Hall. The ballet is known for its annual “Nutcracker” performances, which this year will run at Anaheim’s Freedman Forum theater.

Wrap-Up: I asked Sheila Kern, librarian for The Times Orange County Edition, if she would dig up for me what the state 4th District Court of Appeal had to say about Dawson’s claim that Brower was ineffective as his counsel.

The court wrote in 1990, in upholding Dawson’s conviction, that “Brower’s decisions were sound, consistent, rational and informed, and founded on adequate investigation and preparation.”

That’s the kind of lawyer I’d want if I were in trouble.

Jerry Hicks’ column appears Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday. Readers may reach Hicks by calling the Times Orange County Edition at (714) 966-7823 or by fax to (714) 966-7711, or e-mail to jerry.hicks@latimes.com