A doctor whose patient bled to death after an abortion in Moreno Valley will face a murder trial, despite arguments from a California physicians' group and other supporters that criminal charges are unwarranted.

Riverside County Judge Patrick Magers ruled Friday there is enough evidence to present the case against Bruce Saul Steir to a jury, denying a defense motion to dismiss the second-degree murder charge.

But Magers postponed a prosecution request to allow evidence of similar, though non-fatal, problems in abortions Steir performed in 1988 and 1992. The other two incidents did not lead to criminal charges but are crucial because they could affect how a jury views Steir's actions in the death of Sharon Hamptlon, attorneys on both sides said.

Prosecutor Kennis Clark wants the cases included as evidence, a move defense attorney Doron Weinberg opposes. No trial date has been set for Steir, 67.

Before Friday's hearing, about three dozen Steir supporters -- many from the San Francisco area, where Steir lives -- attended a press conference outside the downtown courthouse. One banner proclaimed: "Abortion doctors are heroes, defend Dr. Bruce Steir."

The crowd moved inside for the hearing, where extra bailiffs were stationed and tension seemed heightened compared to previous hearings in the case. One man became upset when he was barred from the court for wearing shorts, a violation of the dress code.

After Magers denied a defense motion, he ejected a man who feigned applause at Magers' announcement that other cases would keep him from presiding over Steir's trial.

Steir supporters argue the criminal charges were spurred by abortion foes, and some doctors view the case as another example of prosecutors nosing too far into medical decison-making.

Clark has said politics played no part in the charge against Steir.

On Dec. 13, 1996, Steir performed an abortion on Hamptlon, 27, at A Lady's Choice Women's Medical Center in Moreno Valley. After the drive home, Hamptlon's mother could not wake her daughter. Hamptlon was dead by the time an ambulance reached Barstow Community Hospital.

Steir, who was on medical probation in 1996 because of problems with other abortions, acknowledges he perforated Hamptlon's uterus. But Steir maintains he would have made sure Hamptlon received the care she needed if he had known about the damage.

On Friday, the California Medical Association released an analysis by several doctors the group assembled to review medical and court records in the case. The doctors concluded Steir's actions "cannot be characterized as criminally negligent behavior, manslaughter or any kind of criminal act."

The association represents 30,000 doctors in California and agreed to help with Steir's case after receiving a request from the defense team, association spokesman Hobart Swan said. Panelists were chosen because of expertise in abortions and special certification in obstetrics and gynecology, Swan said.

The panel determined Hamptlon's vital signs and condition did not indicate she was in distress. Some might suggest the analysis amounts to doctors protecting doctors, Swan acknowledged. But peer review is needed to evaluate proper medical procedures, he said.

"Who else can assess what a physician has done but a physician?" Swan asked.

The prosecutor was unswayed, however. Some records about Hamptlon's vital signs are disputed, Clark said. And it is difficult to assess the panel's findings without knowing what was considered and how conclusions were reached, she said.

Clark maintains Steir knew he injured Hamptlon. A sonogram technician who assisted with the abortion testified at a preliminary hearing that Steir said he thought he grabbed the bowel with an instrument during the procedure.

Since the uterus must be perforated to reach the bowel, the statement shows Steir knew what he had done, Clark said. Steir also was aware of the danger because he perforated uteri in other abortions, she said.

Even if Steir did not intend to harm Hamptlon, he deserves a second-degree murder charge because he knew the potential danger and did nothing in response, she said.

Defense attorney Weinberg said Steir's actions amounted to no more than negligence. He told Magers the linchpin of the prosecution's case was a single statement that the sonogram technician could have misunderstood.

"You can't speculate like that," he said outside the courtroom. "You can't put motive in a doctor's mind."

Published 7/11/1998