Prosecutors rap ruling in Hells Angels case

Wednesday, April 5, 2006 | 7:19 a.m.

Prosecutors say the Nevada Supreme Court's ruling last week in the 2003 Laughlin motorcycle melee case "changed 140 years of practice in the way we hold people accountable for crime."

The court shot down an indictment in which prosecutors argued that the Hells Angels and Mongols who fought at Harrah's Laughlin in 2003 were all liable for the three deaths that resulted.

Prosecutors, the court ruled, wrongly charged the 14 defendants as conspirators using an old legal theory that would hold the men involved in the fight liable for the deaths even if they weren't directly responsible.

"This problem was not an issue raised by the defendants, instead the court raised it on its own," prosecutor Chris Owens said. "The net result here is it changes the way we hold someone accountable for their actions. People should be liable for the danger they create."

The Hells Angels' attorney, Assistant Federal Public Defender Mike Powell, said the justices simply addressed the fact that Nevada doesn't have a law dealing with what's known as "vicarious co-conspirator liability."

"The Legislature has never addressed the issue," he said. "If the state wants a statute, then they can go ahead and draw up a bill draft and try to get one on the books."

Owens said the Clark County district attorney's office will ask the Legislature to create such a law, but he said the court overturned a legal theory that, since 1870, has held "the act of one is the act of all."

That theory was created by the courts and later adopted into law by 32 states. While it has never been adopted in Nevada, Owens said, when the theory has been changed it has been done so by a legislative body, not by a court.

In originally arguing the issue before District Judge Donald Mosley, defense attorneys argued that the charges of conspiracy should be dismissed because by having the Hells Angels and Mongols all charged with conspiracy, the prosecution is essentially saying members of each gang conspired to hurt members of their own gang.

Prosecutors contended that "unintentional consequences" fall under the scope of conspiracy charges.

Owens said it was similar to the state's felony murder rule. Under the rule, if a murder is committed during the commission of a felony, whether intentional or not, the individual committing the felony is held accountable for the murder.

Mosley agreed with the prosecutors and said it seemed the two parties "agreed to rumble" and the injuries that occurred, foreseeable or not, validated the conspiracy charges.

The Supreme Court overruled Mosley, saying there was "insufficient evidence supporting the probable cause of a single conspiracy between all of the members of the two groups."

Co-prosecutor Bill Kephart said the ruling will not lead to any negotiations in the case and said the ruling really shouldn't change much. He said he and Owens will go back to the drawing board and rewrite the indictment to conform with the court's ruling.

"Based on the recent opinion, we're in a situation where we are going to back up and come at it from a different angle," Kephart said. "The court dismissed two counts, we're going to change the language in the other 50 counts and go to trial."

Powell said he and other defense attorneys would wait for the new indictment but said a trial is likely a long way off.

"No one is going to try and rush it," he said after being asked about when a trial would start. "I mean we already had an extraordinary writ granted once already, so I think everyone is going to be even more careful this time around."