Despite repeated assertions of innocence, he pleaded guilty in March 2008 to a lesser charge – that he knew a crime was being committed but failed to report it.
His plea connects with the Supreme Court decision because, basically, he pleaded guilty to failure to report the loss of honest services.
Lackey accepted the alleged bribe as the FBI’s cooperating witness. The federal indictment claimed the conspiracy was aimed at securing Lackey’s favorable rulings in a legal-fees lawsuit against the senior Scruggs.
Zach Scruggs’ attorney, Edward D. “Chip” Robertson Jr. of Leawood, Kan., said their legal team plans to look more deeply at the Supreme Court decision and see where it may take them.
“The ruling looks like it may provide some interesting things that we might be able to use on Zach’s behalf,” Robertson said via telephone from Chicago on Thursday.
Also speaking from Chicago, Scruggs confirmed he was there to strategize about what the ruling could mean for him.
They declined to speculate if the new decision could be used to overturn his guilty plea.
NE MS Daily Journal