Davis Denial of Probation May Set Up Showdown

SACRAMENTO —  Setting the stage for a standoff in court, Gov. Gray Davis on Saturday blocked the release of a Calabasas murderer whose case has triggered a widening backlash against the administration’s rigid stand on parole.

Davis said Robert Rosenkrantz, imprisoned 15 years for killing a schoolmate who exposed him as a homosexual, has not served enough time and would pose “a significant risk of danger to society” if set free.

“It is my considered judgment that the gravity of Mr. Rosenkrantz’s offense and his repeated attempts to minimize his culpability evidence a continued threat to the public,” Davis said in a 12-page statement.

The governor’s reasoning contradicts the findings of two courts that concluded there is no proof Rosenkrantz remains dangerous and ordered the state parole board to set a date for his release.

Given those rulings, lawyers for Rosenkrantz said they would immediately return to court to challenge Davis’ action. Their lawsuit will test a California governor’s latitude in denying parole to an eligible inmate.

“The courts have looked at the whole record and could not find one fact that suggests Mr. Rosenkrantz is unsuitable for parole,” said Donald Specter of the Prison Law Office, a nonprofit Bay Area organization involved in the case. “We believe the governor is bound by that.”

Legal scholars said Davis could be on shaky ground because his record--and statements to the media--suggest he has a blanket policy against parole.

A 1988 ballot initiative gave the governor authority to review all parole grants by the state Board of Prison Terms. He can block the release of murderers and ask the board to reconsider its decision in other types of cases, but he must decide each one on its merits.

Thirty-four parole grants have been sent to Davis since he took office, and he has opposed parole in all but one case. In a 1999 interview with The Times, he conveyed his intentions with respect to murderers, saying, “If you take someone else’s life, forget it.”

The governor’s staff has since characterized that statement as political rhetoric. Scholars say the governor’s denials of parole to 33 eligible inmates--all of whom have exemplary prison records and have been judged low risks by state psychiatrists--make him legally vulnerable.

“The governor has behaved like a tyrant in a totalitarian state, brushing aside the laws of the land and denying [almost] everyone parole,” said Peter Keane, dean of Golden Gate University Law School in San Francisco. “Eventually, he’s going to lose. It’s just a question of when.”

Keane added that by fighting the Rosenkrantz case, Davis might be inviting a sweeping court ruling that could rein in his authority.

Some, however, applaud the governor’s position. Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca recently came out against the parole of Rosenkrantz. And Larry Diamond, the Los Angeles County deputy district attorney who prosecuted Rosenkrantz in 1986, said Davis had made the right call.

“I think there was intense pressure on the governor to release Rosenkrantz by people who have a fundamental misunderstanding of the facts of this case,” Diamond said. “The governor’s decision was a fair one, based on a true version of events.”

Rosenkrantz, 33, has been in custody since July 23, 1985, when he surrendered for the murder of Steven Redman, 17. A high school senior of 18, Rosenkrantz was at his family’s beach house on graduation night when Redman and Rosenkrantz’s brother, Joey, entered the home and found him with a male lover. They later told Rosenkrantz’s parents what they had seen.

Fearful that his father would disown him for his sexual orientation, Rosenkrantz fled the family home and purchased an Uzi. A week later, he confronted Redman and demanded that he retract the story. When Redman refused, Rosenkrantz shot him 10 times.

Convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to 17 years to life, Rosenkrantz has been a model inmate and has attracted widespread support in his quest for parole. Legislators have lobbied for his freedom, as have the Superior Court judge who presided over his trial and a detective who investigated the case.

Gay and lesbian groups have characterized Redman’s outing of Rosenkrantz as a hate crime that mitigated the murder that followed.

But in his detailed statement on the case, Davis said: “The stress Mr. Rosenkrantz felt over disclosure of his homosexuality does not minimize the viciousness of this murder.”

He added that Rosenkrantz “should be grateful” he was not convicted of first-degree murder, arguing that the inmate “carefully planned, practiced and prepared” for the shooting.

Rosenkrantz’s attorney, Rowan Klein, responded that “the jury flatly rejected” prosecutors’ request for a first-degree murder conviction. “This is just another example of the governor believing he’s above the law,” Klein said.

The Rosenkrantz case is notable because two courts have found that the board has abused its discretion in denying the inmate a release date. The first, in 1999, was Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Kathryne Ann Stoltz.

In April, the 2nd District Court of Appeal upheld her ruling and threatened to cite parole board members for contempt if they did not set a date for Rosenkrantz’s release. In July, the board did so, which bumped the case to Davis.

At least two courts already have cited the Rosenkrantz case in siding with inmates who say they are rehabilitated and should go free. In Marin County, Superior Court Judge Peter Allen Smith ordered the parole board to set a release date for Edward Ramirez, who has served 18 years for the accidental death of a robbery accomplice in Ventura County. Smith found there was no proof Ramirez remains dangerous. His parole hearing will be held later this month.

In Mendocino County, Judge Joseph Orr made the same finding with respect to convicted murderer William Mayfield. Orr demanded that board members hold a new hearing. They did so last week, again rejecting parole.