D.A. to Propose Dual-Jury Trials in Woods Slaying : Courts: Advocates say concept saves time, money. Critics point out problems with logistics, chance for legal errors that could harm prosecution’s murder case.

SANTA ANA —  The prosecutor in the slaying of a San Clemente teen-ager will make the unusual request Monday of seeking not one but two dual-jury murder trials, a procedure that gained recent attention in the Los Angeles trials of Erik and Lyle Menendez.

Under the complicated scenario--played out only a handful of times before in Orange County--two separate juries consider the fate of different defendants in the same trial.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Gary Paer said he will request the two dual-jury trials for four San Clemente youths charged with murder and other felony counts in the slaying of Steve Woods, who died after being pierced through the head with a paint-roller rod last October. A fifth defendant, 20-year-old Juan Enriquez Alcocer, would have his own murder trial in part because his case has moved more quickly through the judicial system.

Four of the defendants are set for arraignment Monday in Superior Court in Santa Ana. At that time, Paer, who prosecuted a dual-jury murder trial in 1992, said he intends to make his request. A judge’s approval would mean three separate trials, instead of five.

While dual juries pose considerable logistical challenges, especially in courtrooms designed for only one jury, Paer said the unusual procedure spares expense and repeated court appearances for witnesses.

“It’s a way to resolve the case in a way that is convenient for the witnesses, and actually cuts down on court time,” he said.

Stephen J. Biskar, a deputy public defender representing one of the defendants in the Woods case, said he and other defense lawyers involved are considering the request.

“I don’t really see the harm in it,” said Biskar, who represented a client in a dual-jury trial several years ago. “It’s just somewhat awkward at times.”

Facing the prospect of dual-jury trials are defendants Saul Penuelas, 18; his brother, Hector Penuelas, 17; Julio Perez Bonilla, 17; and Rogelio Vasquez Solis, 17, each charged with murder, conspiracy, assault and other counts in Woods’ death.

Another defendant, Arturo Villalobos, 20, has already pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter in Woods’ killing, with the possibility of an additional penalty for alleged gang involvement.

Woods, 17, was a passenger in a vehicle pelted by rocks, beer cans, paint rollers and other items as it attempted to leave a beach parking lot seven months ago. He was speared through the head with a paint roller rod during the barrage and later died.

Sheriff’s investigators testified that Woods and his friends said they were trying to flee the beach parking lot and avoid a fight with the defendants. But the defendants contend they were provoked by one of Woods’ friends and began throwing items in self-defense.

Dual-jury trials are more common in Los Angeles County, and officials say they have only occurred about three times in Orange County. Some attribute the rarity to a shortage of large courtrooms.

“It’s basically two trials going on simultaneously,” said Municipal Court Judge Gary P. Ryan, who presided as a Superior Court judge in a 1992 dual-jury murder case.

The procedure, Ryan said, involved a lot of extra work. He left court tired each day, but it worked well and saved about two weeks of valuable court time by eliminating the need for a second trial, the judge said.

Some who have been through dual-jury trials, however, said they’d rather not repeat the experience. And local judges have rejected dual-jury proposals in at least two recent murder cases involving multiple defendants.

David A. Zimmerman, a defense lawyer involved in what was apparently the county’s first dual-jury trial in 1990, called the process a “logistical nightmare.”

In his case, Zimmerman said, one jury sat in the jury box while the the other sat in the front rows of the courtroom, with the two juries switching places throughout the trial. But that posed problems in gauging the jurors’ reaction to evidence and relating to them as he presented his case, the attorney said.

Zimmerman said he has told several local judges: “If you can do anything else to avoid it, do it, because you’re going to be miserable.”

Defense lawyers who have been through dual-jury trials say there’s also a greater risk of mistakes that could cause a mistrial in one or both trials, because of potential problems with jury instructions, inadmissible evidence and other issues.

“You have to be very careful in terms of what is being said to make sure you don’t cross any line that affects the other trial inadvertently,” said Ed Hall, a defense lawyer who represented a defendant in the 1992 dual-jury trial.

“At the outset, there can be substantial cost savings,” he continued. “But if there’s some type of mix-up, that’s all for naught.”

The dual-jury proposals can help to deal with complicated court rules that prohibit use of a confession by one defendant to implicate a co-defendant. To avoid separate trials, judges can allow lawyers to delete or “sanitize” allegations in a confession about co-defendants. Then one jury can hear the case for everyone.

But in some cases, statements are too riddled with allegations about co-defendants to be “sanitized” effectively.

Paer said that if he were to sanitize lengthy statements made by the defendants in the Woods case--evidence that is crucial to his case--he’d be left with “three or four lines.”

At times when testimony can only be heard by one jury, the other jury leaves the room.

Despite the challenges, lawyers and judges say the procedure can work well.

“We had a large courtroom, so it worked out fine,” said Thomas Avdeef, a former deputy district attorney who prosecuted the 1990 dual-jury case involving a Garden Grove drive-by gang shooting that killed two people, including a 4-year-old boy.