MAULING CASE PUTS LIBERAL S.F. DA IN SPOTLIGHT

San Francisco's top prosecutor believes so strongly in medicinal marijuana
he recently testified -- for the defense -- at the trial of two men accused
of growing pot for patients. He admits he once smoked the stuff. And inhaled.

Terence Hallinan was the only district attorney in the state to support the
drug treatment-over-incarceration initiative, Proposition 36. He favors
legalizing prostitution and refuses to seek the death penalty.

Hallinan gladly spars over the liberal agenda that often makes him a lone
voice in law enforcement. Yet what's put him in the spotlight these days is
the headline-grabbing case of a woman killed by her neighbors' dogs.

"All you have to do is say 'the dog case,' and everybody in America -- if
not the whole world -- knows what you're talking about," concedes Hallinan,
64, who says he will "probably" run for mayor when term limits force Willie
Brown out in 2004. "To me, it's just another case."

Hardly. The vicious, fatal mauling of lacrosse coach Diane Whipple in
January shocked the city and made national news. Subsequent revelations
linking the two dogs' owners, Marjorie Knoller and Robert Noel, to
dog-breeding convicts were lurid. And critics said Hallinan's decision to
charge Knoller with second-degree murder was motivated by public pressure;
many Bay Area gays stood behind the victim's partner in calling for murder
charges.

Knoller's attorney, Jan Lecklikner, has accused Hallinan of bowing to the
hysteria surrounding the case. She called it shameful to bring a murder
charge against "a woman who lost control of her dog."

But these extremes -- the liberal who avoids prosecuting "victimless"
crimes and the district attorney accused of going overboard on violent
crime -- are not necessarily incongruous for the onetime boxer known as
"Kayo" and scion of a famously liberal family whose life of both privilege
and outspoken activism has earned its members a reputation as "San
Francisco's Kennedys."

A father of five who owns a cocker spaniel, a bichon frise and a toy
poodle, Hallinan has no qualms about throwing the book at Knoller, who was
present during the attack. Her husband is charged with involuntary
manslaughter; both would face prison time if convicted.

"Over the last few months, I've lost more than a night's sleep over Noel
and Knoller," Hallinan said, sitting in his office at the Hall of Justice.
"Everybody feels these people were out of line, did an evil thing and
should be punished."

That's what the city's large vocalnumber of bicyclists thought when a truck
driver hit and killed one of their own in November. They held frequent
rallies, demanding criminal charges. Hallinan eventually filed felony
manslaughter charges, making the driver eligible for a "three strikes"
conviction and life in prison.

But April 17, a judge tossed out the felony charge.

"It was very frustrating to see it take off as a political case when the
facts weren't there," said David Simerly, an attorney who initially
represented the driver.

Even under fire, Hallinan continues to fight for his signature causes.

In March, he testified that the Sonoma County men growing pot for a
cannabis club were operating within the guidelines of Proposition 215, the
1996 state initiative legalizing marijuana for medical use. The case never
would have been prosecuted in San Francisco, he said. The men were acquitted.

The Hallinan-backed Proposition 36, which mandates treatment rather than
incarceration for many drug offenders, passed in November with the support
of 60 percent of voters.

"Terence is far more in touch with the attitudes of voters in California
than are his colleagues," said Keith Stroup, executive director of NORML,
the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.

"He's not the only prosecutor in America who feels that way," added Stroup,
a friend of Hallinan's since the 1970s. "But right now he's the only one
who has the courage to say that out loud, in public."

When Hallinan, who says he smoked marijuana "a long time ago," received an
award from NORML at a ceremony in April, he spoke about AIDS and cancer
patients who benefit from the drug. "He literally teared up," Stroup recalled.

Some say Hallinan's liberalism -- and pugnacity -- are as much a product of
genetics as his blue eyes. His father, Vincent, was a legendary defense
lawyer often jailed for contempt of court. In 1952 he ran for president on
the Progressive Party ticket -- from prison. Hallinan's mother, Vivian, was
a well-known peace activist.

As a youth, Hallinan was arrested for assault and battery and, as a student
protester, was clubbed by San Francisco police. The State Bar of California
tried to deny him a law license, on grounds of character.

He appealed and won, going on to defend clients that included heiress Patty
Hearst and mass murderer Juan Corona. Then came a stint as a San Francisco
supervisor, when he advocated decriminalization of prostitution and
legalization of medicinal marijuana. He was first elected district attorney
in 1995, and narrowly won re-election over former prosecutor Bill Fazio in
1999.

Hallinan's soft-on-crime image irked even former Public Defender Jeff
Brown, who accused him of taking too few cases to trial.

"Criminal prosecution was not his lodestar. He was more interested in
developing alternatives," Brown said. "I think you have to do both."

Still, recently, he has begun to earn guarded praise from police who
concede his heart's in the right place -- even though they wish he were
tougher on criminals.

"He's somewhere to the left of Karl Marx, and I'm somewhere to the right of
Attila the Hun," quipped police Lt. Henry Hunter, who led the police
investigation of the dog case. "I understand where he's coming from. I
don't always agree with the choices he makes."