Claudia Martin, neighborhood prosecutor for the City Attorney’s office, prosecuted and obtained a conviction involving the sale of unauthorized items on the boardwalk at Venice Beach this past April.
The boardwalk in question is the west side of the boardwalk that goes from Windward Circle to Navy.
Vendor was warned by police, but vendor stated that prohibited items were on display only, not for sale. Prohibited items were later sold to undercover policemen same day.
People v. Igbinoba 3WA01312: NP Martin appeared for jury trial on April 21, 2014 on this matter. The defendant pled No Contest to violating LAMC 42.15(e.) (2)-illegally vending on the Venice Beach Boardwalk. He was placed on probation for 12 months. The defendant was arrested on July 6, 2013 when uniformed LAPD officers warned the defendant that selling jewelry on the Venice Beach Boardwalk was prohibited under LAMC 42.15 (Venice Beach Vending Ordinance). The defendant replied that he was displaying the items and not selling them. The same day he was warned, undercover LAPD officers approached the defendant’s vending space and purchased two bracelets from the defendant. He was charged with one count of LAMC 42.15(e) (2)-illegal vending.
Venice Beach vendors on the west side of the boardwalk are governed by Los Angeles Municipal Code 42.15. Section 42.15 restricts vending, regulates performing and prohibits the generation of excessive noise on the Venice Boardwalk and adjacent beach and public spaces.
Only certain items are allowed for vending. What had been happening was that police were told by vendor that prohibited items were only on display, not for sale. An undercover policeman purchased a “for display only” item.
Section 42.15 allocates 205 spaces on westside of boardwalk and further defines their usage to:
1) Persons who engage in traditional expressive speech and petitioning activities, such as newspapers, leaflets, pamphlets, bumper stickers, patches and/or buttons.
2) Persons can vend the following items which have been created, written or composed, such as books, audio, video, or other recordings of their performances, paintings, photographs, prints, sculptures, or any other item that is inherently communicative and is of nominal value or utility apart from its communication.
3) Although an item may have some expressive purpose, it will be deemed to have more than nominal utility apart from its communication if it has a common and dominant non-expressive purpose. Examples of items that have more than nominal utility apart from their communication and thus are subject to the Vending ban under the provision of the Section 42.15, include but are not limited to, the following: housewares, appliances, articles of clothing, sunglasses, auto parts, oils, incense, perfume, crystals, lotions, candles, jewelry, toys and stuffed animals.
4) Performers can perform.
Pleading “No Contest” and “Getting a conviction” are two very different things. Had the defendant gone to a jury he/she may have come away with a not guilty verdict. After all in this time of soaring unemployment and bank bailouts I doubt very seriously that a jury of Los Angelenos would convict someone for merely trying to make a living.