X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Criminal defense attorney Arthur Bocanegra is setting the pace for fund raising in the South Bay’s two judicial elections. Bocanegra has raised $64,978 to fuel his campaign since it began. Bocanegra lists more than 100 individual donors, including 92 attorneys and law firms, on his July 30 financial statement. He has also accepted a $150 donation from Kelly’s Bail Bonds. Deputy DA Aaron Persky, who is running in the other judge’s race, has raised $47,484 since the campaign started against fellow Deputy DA Ron Del Pozzo. Del Pozzo, whose supporters have thrown a series of fund-raisers this summer, reported raising $31,785 since the start of the election. Deputy DA George Chadwick, who is running against Bocanegra, did not submit the July 30 campaign financial statement, according to Santa Clara Registrar of Voters staff. But as of March 2002, the candidate had spent a little less than $9,000 of his own money on campaigning. During the November election, Chadwick has pledged not to take monetary campaign contributions and in his most recent ballot statement reiterates that promise. Chadwick did not return calls about the missing financial statement. – Shannon Lafferty OUCH Most anyone would love to see their mother immortalized in a work of art, but what Bobette Heuer saw in the main gallery of Los Angeles’ California Institute of the Arts on May 13, 1999, brought her to tears. On display was a 25-by-40-inch pencil drawing of a student-faculty orgy, and in the midst of it was a likeness of her 82-year-old mom, Mary Herberg, bare-breasted, facing the viewer and straddling a nude male faculty member “as though the two were engaged in sexual intercourse.” Heuer, director of financial aid at the school, and Herberg, a cashier in the accounting office, joined with Heuer’s daughter, Deborah Dutro, the purchasing and production manager of the public affairs office, in suing CalArts for sexual harassment under the state’s Fair Employment and Housing Act. They claimed that the drawing, by two art students, had created a hostile working environment. On Tuesday, in a published opinion, L.A.’s Second District Court of Appeal ruled against the women, saying that the drawing, which had been on display for only about 24 hours, did not constitute “severe or pervasive” harassment. “The trial court found that this incident, although doubtless upsetting to the plaintiffs, did not create a workplace that was ‘so discriminatory and abusive that it unreasonably interfere[d] with the job performance of those harassed,” Justice Dennis Perluss wrote. Acting Presiding Justice Earl Johnson Jr. and Justice Fred Woods concurred. According to the ruling, the drawing, titled “The Last Art Piece,” had been created by students Ariel Rosenberg and Jeremy Ringermacher to mix representational art, which is an actual depiction, and conceptual art, which communicates ideas and concepts. The drawing created a furor, but CalArts officials stood by their policy of not censoring students’ artwork. Herberg never returned to her job. In a footnote, the Second District, while siding with school officials overall, rejected their argument that the First Amendment and the school’s anti-censorship policy provide blanket protection from sex harassment claims. But they expressed a liberal viewpoint on the controversial drawing. “In our view,” Perluss wrote, “it was reasonable to expect that exhibitions of student artwork would, from time to time, include sexually explicit material.” The case is Herberg v. California Institute of the Arts, 02 C.D.O.S. 7400. — Mike McKee OH, DRY UP It’s not quite a stake to the heart, but a ruling last week should be enough to keep a self-proclaimed vampire from prowling the streets for a long time to come. On Wednesday, San Francisco’s First District Court of Appeal upheld the second-degree murder conviction of Joshua Rudiger, an Oakland resident who killed Shirley Dilahanty two days before Halloween 1998 by slashing her throat and drinking her blood. Rudiger, the so-called “vampire slasher” who preyed on the homeless in San Francisco, also attacked three men during an October-November rampage. The First District’s unpublished decision lets stand a 23-year-to-life sentence imposed in 2000 by San Francisco Superior Court Judge James Warren. Rudiger had argued that Warren erred by not instructing jurors on the possibility of finding him guilty of the lesser crime of involuntary manslaughter. Rudiger claimed he lacked malice when he murdered Dilahanty while she slept in the Mission District. “Here the evidence to support the conclusion that [Rudiger] acted with implied malice was overwhelming,” Justice Barbara Jones wrote. “He went stalking for prey, selected a victim, pounced on her and slashed her throat. Then, using his victim’s blood, [Rudiger] wrote the Chinese symbol for death on the sidewalk next to her body. “Based on that evidence,” Jones continued, “we conclude it is not ‘reasonably probable’ [Rudiger] would have achieved a more favorable result had the jury been instructed on involuntary manslaughter.” Justices Lawrence Stevens and Mark Simons concurred. The case is People v. Rudiger, A091031. — Mike McKee

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.