Glynn Wilson

Former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman in front of the federal courthouse in Montgomery

by Glynn Wilson

The United States Supreme Court has vacated the political convictions of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman and former HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy, prosecuted by the Bush Justice Department, and ordered an appeals court to review the cases in light of a recent high court ruling questioning the use of a vague mail fraud law.

The high court ordered the U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta to review the Siegelman-Scrushy case in light of a recent Supreme Court ruling against “honest services fraud,” a vague and over used statute in political corruption cases, according to critics.

Last week the justices found fault with the honest services mail fraud statute in the case of former Enron chief Jeffrey Skilling. Since then, defense attorneys for Siegelman and Scrushy expressed some hope that ruling would give them a new chance to challenge their convictions.

Many lower court judges and scholars have called the law “hopelessly vague,” saying it could apply to conduct as routine as calling in sick to go to a baseball game, according to the New York Times. Critics have said the law gives potential defendants insufficient notice of what is a crime and prosecutors too much discretion in deciding whom to charge.

According to today’s Supreme Court ruling, the petitions for writs of certiorari were granted, meaning the court agreed to hear both Siegelman’s and Scrushy’s appeal. The high court “vacated” the convictions, meaning they are overturned — unless the appeals court can find a way to justify the conviction without three of the five counts related to mail fraud, apparently. The court remanded the cases to the appeals court in Atlanta “for further consideration in light of Skilling v. United States.”

Today’s order comes four years after Siegelman’s conviction by a tainted jury, and three years after his sentencing by a Republican federal judge with a conflict of interest.

So far, attorneys are not clear on exactly what the Supreme Court’s order means. Apparently the high court agreed to hear the appeal just to send it back to the lower court to rule on the case without using two of the counts Siegelman was convicted on.

The conservative three judge panel for the Eleventh Circuit now has a chance to revise the ruling upholding the original conviction by Chief U.S. District Judge Mark E. Fuller in Montgomery. Fuller has yet to issue a ruling deciding, based on another legal filing, whether he should recuse himself from deciding whether Siegelman and Scrushy deserve a new trial.

Siegelman was convicted on seven counts, including five instances of mail fraud and one instance of bribery involving his dealings with Scrushy to pay off the debt on a failed education lottery campaign, along with one count each of conspiracy and obstruction of justice.

In upholding the convictions of Siegelman and Scrushy, the appeals court reversed the district court’s conviction only on two of the five counts of mail fraud, leaving three intact. Six counts of honest services mail fraud remain against Scrushy, who is still in prison with no appeal bond.

Sam Heldman, one of the attorneys who handled Siegelman’s appeal before the Supreme Court, called the decision “a massive victory.”

“I think this is a step toward a final and complete legal victory,” Heldman said. “The allegation of acting because a political contributor wants you to act a certain way may be many things, but it is not bribery.”

Is it possible that the appeals court could vacate the verdict on the remaining three counts of mail fraud and still uphold the conviction on the remaining two counts of bribery, conspiracy and obstruction of justice? Stay tuned. We will report on it and explain it when it becomes clear.

The ruling is not surprising, according to New York attorney and Harper’s magazine contributing editor Scott Horton, who has followed the case closely.

“The ruling is not surprising and is more a matter of housekeeping — it’s a direction to the Eleventh Circuit to follow and apply Skilling to the case,” Horton said in an e-mail interview.

In the Skilling ruling, he said, “the court split with the three most conservative judges wanting to strike down all the political prosecutions involving the honest-services fraud statute, while the centrist and liberal judges sought to narrow and salvage it. The majority is clearly sharply critical of the Justice Department’s use of this statute and wants it applied only in clear-cut cases of bribery, such as where a clear quid pro quo exists.

“That certainly wouldn’t cover the Siegelman prosecution,” he said. “But that decision has to be made by the Eleventh Circuit. If it decides that the conviction stands, my expectation is that the matter would return to the Supreme Court, where the conviction would stand little prospect of being upheld.”

Tags: US Supreme Court Orders Review of Siegelman Scrushy Convictions

This entry was posted on Tuesday, June 29th, 2010 at 9:41 am and is filed under Don Siegelman on Trial. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.