Nov 5, 2007 2:04 pm US/Central
Gov't Urges High Court To Deny Bond To Ryan
CHICAGO (AP) ―
-
-
Former Gov. George Ryan (File)
CBS
Former Gov. George Ryan received a fair trial and should not be allowed to remain free on bail while appealing his corruption conviction, federal officials told the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday.
There is no chance the Supreme Court will even consider Ryan's appeal and therefore no reason why he should not start serving his 6 1/2-year prison sentence, federal officials said in a 32-page brief.
It came two days before the 73-year-old former governor was due to report to the federal correctional center at Oxford, Wis., to start serving his 6 1/2-year racketeering and fraud sentence.
Ryan and co-defendant Larry Warner, who also is seeking bail, have remained free on bond since their April 2006 convictions.
Their last, slender hope of postponing the start of their prison sentences is a plea for bail to Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens.
Stevens on Friday gave the U.S. solicitor general's office until Monday afternoon to come up with a reply to the request for a fresh bond.
The government brushed aside claims by Ryan's attorneys that the six-month trial was plagued by errors, saying they were "unsupported by the record and contrary to the District Court's factual findings."
Trial Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer's findings that Ryan and Warner had a fair trial were upheld by the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, the solicitor general's office reminded the high court.
In fact, the appeals court affirmed the convictions in a 2-1 split decision. Ryan and Warner then asked the appeals court to reconsider and were turned down in 6-3 split decision.
Judge Michael S. Kanne, who sat on the three-judge panel, dissented and said the trial had been "riddled with errors."
Ryan was convicted of steering big-money state contracts to Warner and other friends, using state money and state workers to run his campaigns and killing an investigation of bribes paid in exchange for truck driver's licenses.
Ryan's claim he did not receive a fair trial is primarily based on chaotic jury deliberations. Two jurors were dismissed after it was found they had omitted mention of their police records on a questionnaire.
They were replaced with alternates after the original jury already had met eight times to deliberate. One of the jurors was found to have brought an unauthorized document into the jury room, there was discussion of granting immunity from prosecution to jurors and two jurors hired lawyers.
The government quoted defense attorneys' request for bail as saying there was "a raft of other juror misconduct," but "ignoring the District Court's specific findings that no such misconduct occurred."
(© 2009 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)
Click to enlarge
Stumble It!
