People v. Sperl

• Citation: 126 Cal.Rptr. 907,54 Cal.App.3d 640
• Decision Date: 21 January 1976
• Docket Number: Cr. 26259
• Court: California Court of Appeals
• Parties: PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Timothy SPERL, Defendant and Appellant.

Page 907

126 Cal.Rptr. 907

54 Cal.App.3d 640

PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Timothy SPERL, Defendant and Appellant.

Cr. 26259.

Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 5, California.

Jan. 21, 1976.

Hearing Denied March 24, 1976.

As Modified on Denial of Rehearing Feb. 19, 1976.

Richard H. Levin, Los Angeles, for defendant and appellant

Evelle J. Younger, Atty. Gen., Jack R. Winkler, Chief Asst. Atty. Gen., S. Clark Moore, Asst. Atty. Gen., Norman H. Sokolow and Lawrence P. Scherb II, Deputy Attys. Gen., for plaintiff and respondent.

HASTINGS, Associate Justice.

In a nonjury trial defendant Sperl, who was the Marshal for Los Angeles County, was convicted in count I of violating Penal Code section 424, subdivision 3, in that he had knowingly kept false accounts relating to the receipt, etc., of public moneys (Legislative Advocates transaction); in count III of violating section 424, subdivision 1, in that he misappropriated public moneys for the use of another (Candidate's Driver transaction); in count V of violating section 424, subdivision 3 in that he knowingly kept false accounts or made false entries or erasures in accounts relating to the receipt, etc. of public moneys (Marina Del Rey transaction); in count VII of violating Government Code section 6200 (theft, destruction, falsification, secretion or removal of public records by an officer custodian); and in count IX of violating Government Code section 31114, subdivision 3, a misdemeanor (furnishing special and secret information for the purpose of either improving or injuring the prospects of persons to be examined under a county civil service system). Defendant's motions for an evidentiary hearing and for a new trial were argued and denied. As to counts I, III V and VII, defendant was sentenced to the state prison for the term prescribed by law, execution of the sentence was suspended, and he was placed on probation for a period of four years, on certain terms and conditions, one thereof being that he spend the first six months in the county jail. As to count IX defendant was fined $500.00; however, payment of the fine and service of the county jail condition were ordered to be stayed pending appeal. Defendant Sperl has appealed from the judgment of conviction.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Count I--Legislative Advocates Transaction

Deputies Sewards, Vogts, and Marquez, Sergeant Johnson and Lieutenant Samuels testified that they were members of the Los Angeles County Marshal's department. At various times during 1971 and 1972 defendant Sperl assigned them to the Administrative Bureau and placed them on special assignment as a legislative advocate representing the Los Angeles County Marshals Association, a private association. In that capacity they were assigned to duties in Sacramento where they would review legislation and make recommendations to the local Legislative Committee on matters that were of interest to their particular association. They were not acting on behalf of the Marshal's Department of Los Angeles County. As a legislative advocate they would be required to go to Sacramento from time to time, depending on the status of the legislation they were following.

                Their transportation to Sacramento and back, and their expenses for food and lodging while in Sacramento, were paid for by the Association. 1  However, they continued to receive their normal pay check from the County of Los Angeles during the entire period of time they were acting as legislative advocates.  The advocates would initial the monthly reports indicating they had worked the normal working hours.  These reports were prepared by Natalie Scotton, defendant's administrative secretary.  It was her responsibility to carry the time for the people assigned to the Administrative Bureau
                

There was nothing in the monthly personnel rosters that would indicate that the deputies were doing anything other than working for the County. There was evidence that Natalie Scotton kept a system of double timekeeping books, 'actual time' and 'Sacramento time.' The deputies understood that time earned for vaction and as compensatory overtime was being deducted in exchange for the time spent in Sacramento; however, all vacation time was 'given back.'

Captain Perkins was Chairman of the Legislative Committed of the Marshal's Association for the fiscal years 1970--71 and 1971--72. In January 1972 defendant told him to keep accurate records of the amount of time the advocates were spending in Sacramento and that they were to go on their vacation time, overtime, or donated vacation time. However, Perkins understood from defendant that the time spent in Sacramento 'should not be a sacrifice to their own personal vacation time; that time would be restored.'

Perkins spoke with defendant about the sufficiency of overtime and vacation time of advocates to cover their activities in Sacramento. Perkins told defendant that the advocates wanted to take their own personal vacation time but there was 'no time left' on the books. Defendant told him to mark the men present when, in fact, they were not present.

Perkins further stated that he was present when defendant told Natalie Scotton to mark absent deputies as present or on overtime that was manufactured.

In late 1973 and early 1974, Captain Perkins, who had a background in accounting and bookkeeping, assisted in the grand jury inquiry and reconstructed time spent on legislative activities as to each advocate and carried a balance as to what was due the county or due to the advocate. He was assisted by Natalie Scotton and an auditor from the district attorney's office. His sources included Scotton's books, the monthly personnel reports, Departmental absence reports, and overtime slips. A recap sheet introduced into evidence showed the loss to the county for advocate time spent in Sacramento. The total raw figure for all legislative advocates was $11,185.99. (People's Exhibit 1), and the total figure after giving credit for 'questionable time' was approximately $5,024.

Natalie Scotton, defendant's administrative secretary, testified that in early 1972 defendant instructed her to show the advocates as absent on the days they were in Sacramento but to 'work it' so that the advocates would not lose any of their own time. She was to keep a separate record as to the time these men were actually off on their own time and then to show them present for these days on the timesheet that went to the payroll office. When the deputies were in Sacramento, she showed them on vacation or overtime. When they were running out of vacation and overtime, she would then 'manufacture' overtime by adding

hours to their normal day. Count III--Candidate's Driver Transaction: Misappropriation of Public Monies

Gene Baraldi, deputy marshal for Los Angeles County, received instructions from defendant in January 1972 to pick up then Assemblyman Hayes whenever he received a call and to take him wherever he wanted to go. From the beginning of this special Eddy Tanaka, chief analyst in the County Administration office in 1972, testified that it was the county policy in August 1972 to escort dignitaries (state and federal legislators) if their activity directly related to county

assignment in January until approximately May 5, 1972, Baraldi transported Hayes, his staff and his family in a county automobile. After May 5 and until August 29, 1972 ² he usually used Hayes' personal vehicle; however, he continued [54 Cal.App.3d 648] using the county vehicle to transport Hayes' staff and family. Whenever he was driving a county vehicle, the county paid his wages; when he was driving Hayes' personal car, he would take this time off his overtime. He reported the hours worked to Natalie Scotton. From his personal notebook and trip tickets Baraldi computed that his total salary prior to August 1972 for transporting Hayes, his family and staff amounted to $1,759.72. ³

business. Count V--Marina Del Rey Deputies--Campaign Telephone Calls for a Candidate

In April of 1972 Cherry Povolock was working for Bishop and Associates, an advertising and public relations firm. During that month she coordinated a fund raising testimonial dinner for Hayes who was candidate for the office of County Supervisor. For two to three weeks near the end of April there were two to five men on any given day from the marshal's office who were volunteering their time to make telephone calls.

Several men from the administrative division of the marshal's office testified that they worked on the Hayes dinner: Deputy Locke, approximately 8 days; Deputy Keenan, 5 to 10 days; Sgt. Hopton, 2 days; Deputy Davis, 7 days; Sgt. Tepas, 6 to 8 days; Lt. Hodgkins, 2 days; and Deputy Marquez, 2 half days. With the exception of Deputy Locke, each man understood that the time worked on the testimonial dinner was to be debited against his vacation or compensatory overtime. Deputy Locke did not know at the time how his time was being marked. Sgt. Hopton noticed later that his overtime did not decrease after his assignment.

Natalie Scotton Kept the time records for the administrative division of the marshal's office during April and May of 1972. During the month of April she marked the above deputies present for the days that they actually worked on the dinner. In May or June defendant gave her a list showing these deputies and told her to get back the monthly time sheets from the payroll office to make certain changes. Defendant wanted these men shown as 'off so that they do not lose any of their own time.' He also wanted her to 'destroy all the old documents' and to '(c)hange the records. Mark these people off and fix it so they don't lose any of their own time.' She then proceeded to make the requested changes in both the time book and on the daily absence reports and the monthly time reports. If necessary, she added in overtime for March to cover the time spent for the dinner. The deputies did not...