Judge Biggers narrows the focus on Zach Scruggs’s effort to set aside his plea

Judge Biggers has used Zach Scruggs’s summary judgment motion to narrow the issues in the case, ruling that Zach’s legal arguments about Skilling and Whitfield are correct and granting a summary judgment as to Counts Two, Three, and Four of the original Indictment and the portion of Count One which concerns Title 18 U.S.C. § 666.

His order states that at the hearing a week from Monday will involve Zach Scruggs having to prove enough to get relief on one of four claims:

1) That he is actually innocent under Skilling, which will involve whether he knew of the payment to Judge Lackey, whether the other defendants considered the payment a bribe or a gratuity

2) Whether the plea was involuntary “due to alleged government misrepresentations.”

3) ”conspiracy to commit honest services fraud”

4) “ineffective assistance of counsel.”