From Page 32

Whether we adopt the Third and Ninth Circuit’s conclusion that Sun-Diamond applies in to honest services fraud but that a particular act need not be identified at the time of payment, or the Second Circuit’s conclusion that Sun-
Diamond does not apply to honest services fraud at all, we arrive at the same result—namely, that the district court’s jury instructions in this case accurately stated the law and did not constitute reversible error.

From The Clarion-Ledger:

A U.S. House Judiciary Committee has cited the Minor case as a possible example of selective prosecution, but a new book, “Kings of Tort,” by Alan Lange and retired federal prosecutor Tom Dawson, points to the case as proof of a pattern of attorneys attempting to corruptly influence judges.

Interesting reading the CL take on this - just posted on their website with the article by esteemed investigative reporter, Jerry Mitchell.  To read his article, one would think that the entire conviction has been tossed by the 5th Circuit.

To answer Alan’s question, one would expect the three Appellants to file a petition for rehearing before this three judge panel, and/or a petition for rehearing en banc (before all sixteen judges of the entire Court of Appeals).

Hey get it right Mr. Author Lange of a legal blog.

Section 666 is not Honest Services Charge and all of the convictions stood except for three counts involving Minor and Teel on the Section 666 federal program bribery.

Court had sentenced Minor to:
-60 months as to counts 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10 (conspiracy and mail, wire, and honest services fraud)
-132 months as to counts 3 (racketeering)
-120 months as to counts 12, 14 (federal program bribery)

with all sentences to run concurrently for a total sentence of one hundred and thirty-two months and three years’ supervised release.  The district court fined Minor $250,000 per count, for a total of $2.75 million.  The district court ordered Minor, along with Teel, to pay $1.5 million in restitution to USF&G.

As to Paul Minor, we REVERSE his conviction for conspiracy to commit federal program bribery under Count Two and his convictions for federal program bribery under Counts Twelve and Fourteen.  We AFFIRM his convictions on all other counts.  Because of our reversal as to Counts Two, Twelve, and Fourteen, his sentences on all counts are VACATED and the cause as to him is remanded for resentencing on all the remaining counts of conviction.

Minor’s current release date is 04-01-2016.  The questions to be answered are:
-will the government appeal
-how much time will be vacated due to reversal of some of the counts
-how much money, if any, will be refunded, so to speak, to Minor due to the reversals.

Count One charged Minor and Whitfield with conspiracy to commit various offenses against the United States under 18 U.S.C. § 371, including mail, wire, and honest services fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343, 1346, and federal program bribery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666. 

Count Two charged Minor and Teel with conspiracy to violate the same statutes. 

Count Three charged Minor with racketeering in violation of RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1962, the predicate acts being bribery and wire fraud. 

Counts Four through Seven charged Minor and Whitfield with devising a scheme to defraud the State of Mississippi of its intangible right to honest services through mail fraud,

Count 8 charged Minor with devising a scheme to defraud the State of Mississippi of its intangible right to honest services through wire fraud. 

Counts Nine and Ten charged Minor and Teel with devising a scheme to defraud the State of Mississippi of its intangible right to honest services through mail fraud. 

Count Eleven charged Whitfield with accepting bribes while acting as an agent of a state agency receiving federal funds in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(B),

Count Twelve charged Minor with offering those bribes in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(2).

Count Thirteen charged Teel with accepting bribes while acting as an agent of a state agency receiving federal funds,

Count Fourteen charged Minor with offering those bribes.

Columbia law professor Scott Horton has been following this case closely and provided the following comment:

The charges against Minor and the two Mississippi judges, Wes Teel and John Whitfield, fell into two categories: bribery and honest services fraud. The Fifth Circuit’s decision reviews all the facts in the light most favorable to the Justice Department, and it even adopts a tendentious and harsh tone in talking about Minor and his co-defendants. But it also concludes--as I think it had to--that the facts the Justice Department claimed did not make out a case of bribery. That left the honest-services fraud count standing, so the Court vacated the sentences and is referring the case back for resentencing. But I don’t think there will be any need for that. Why? Because on Monday the Supreme Court heard argument on whether the honest-services fraud statute is constitutional. And tallying up the comments made by the justices at the argument, it’s clear that a solid majority of the justices think the honest-services fraud statute is unconstitutional. Moreover, Justice Breyer went out of his way to ridicule the way the Justice Department was applying it, and his criticism, and Justice Scalia’s, goes right to what the prosecutors did in the Minor case. It will take a few months for this to work its way out, but it’s clear that Minor and his co-defendants are on their way home.

This outcome also raises serious questions about the conduct of the trial judge. He failed even to rule on motions for release pending appeal. And it now appears that the convictions had no merit. The result is that these three defendants were forced to serve jail time on meritless convictions, all thanks to Judge John Wingate, who sat on their motions for release pending appeal. His conduct handling these cases deserves some very close scrutiny, because it suggests a lack of judicious temperament at nearly every stage.
Minor’s attorney, Hiram Eastland Jr, was not immediately available for comment. According to his office, he is en route to deliver the good news to Minor in person.

See, this is the thing.  For all of you Minor defenders who find it necessary to include Judge Wingate in some conspiracy to explain away your man’s conduct, those of us who have practiced before Judge Wingate know immediately that your version of events is delusional.  Judge Wingate is a good judge whose intregrity has never been questioned by anyone, because there is no reason to question his integrity - he is an honest judge.  And if you are willing to smear a judge’s integrity to make your man look good, then I would suggest you share a lot of character traits with your buddy Paul.

I am not an attorney, nor a judge, nor trained in any aspect of the law.
If any of my friends or associates came to me and asked me to get involved in paying off a loan to someone I would be suspicious about the legality or ethics of such an action and would simply ask “Why?”
I do not meet people to have them help me circumvent normal activities because I am afraid of what people think or what might be illegal.
Is it really that difficult to understand this?
In the normal activities of my life, particularly those that are financial, I have nothing to hide from the FBI or other law enforcement agencies.
It comes down to a simple examination of behavior.
Why did Minor secretly meet with people to have loans paid off?
I specifically remember an article by Anita Lee of the Sun Herald describing a scene where Scruggs’ secretary met with Jennifer Diaz to deliver up an “envelope” of cash at a coast restaurant and Diaz was told to come up with more names if they needed more cash.
I think too many people are so embedded in the legal system that they cannot see clearly how an outsider observes all this behavior. 
Again, I would ask, why all the covert activity if there is nothing to hide that might be illegal?

OK, so what is it?  We have a law professor saying Minor had his bribery conviction based on a law that is about to be declared unconstitutional so he is “on his way home.” Then we have NMC, a legal blogger AKA Tom Freeland who is a highly respected attorney, saying that Minor is still convicted of bribery even if the honest services convictions were reversed.  I am not an attorney and have never played one on TV, so would some of you Esquires out there let us peons know just what the 5th CCOA black robes actually did?

I don’t see why everyone assumes the US Supreme Court will flatly overturn the honest services law.  They might just require better definition of the sorts of misconduct which can create the fraud, so a citizen has notice.  Certainly bribery would be part of any reasonable definition.

I’m like Fyodor1, I’m not an attorney (but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night!!) but how do some media outlets call this a victory for Minor.  How is getting only 3 of 14 counts overturned a victory?  Maybe Bill can write a column explaining it to us.

Maybe Bill can write a column explaining it to us.

Hayes, uhh...the only thing Bill Minor will write about this will be more stories of racism in Mississippi’s past.  And I see that Aspen went to the store and got her a new supply of Kool-Aid.

Elwood P Dowd makes a good point:

I don’t see why everyone assumes the US Supreme Court will flatly overturn the honest services law.  They might just require better definition of the sorts of misconduct which can create the fraud, so a citizen has notice.

However, even this would require a reversal of the convictions of Minor, Whitfield, and Teel, so that the jury can apply the narrower definition.  And that would be a huge victory for the defendants.