The federal prosecutors pressing the case against Ruffin Poole, a former longtime aide to ex-Gov. Mike Easley, want a trial by mid-May on the 51 corruption charges leveled against the former governor's right-hand man.
In a filing, they say they want to "move the case to conclusion with dispatch." The prosecutors, Dennis Duffy and John Bruce, are predicting a two- or three-week trial, according to a court filing.
The prosecutors and Poole's lawyer met on Feb. 4 but could not agree on a timeframe for the trial.
Poole's lawyer, in a court filing, is arguing for a later date, saying the case is complex, has Constitutional questions and conflicts with his schedule on some other upcoming trials. Poole's lawyer, Joe Zeszotarski, is proposing a trial to begin in August.
A federal magistrate judge had set out a framework for the case last week, including setting a tentative trial date much earlier than both sides sought — in March.
But that framework was squashed on Monday by U.S. District Court Judge Terrence W. Boyle, who had presided over Poole's first appearance in court and said at the time he would consider the scheduling issues. Boyle issued an order to all magistrate judges Monday saying that he would preside over the Poole case.
Boyle has yet to act on any scheduling issues.
Poole's lawyer said in his filing that the case against Poole appears to rely "heavily on email evidence" and "voluminous financial documents" relating to money laundering, extortion and bribery charges against Poole.
He said that numerous federal agents have been involved and months of grand jury testimony obtained, and that going to trial in May on an "expedited" schedule would be unconstitutional.
He also said Poole intends to challenge the 12 honest services mail fraud charges, which arise from Poole not reporting gifts and other disclosures on state ethics forms.
The federal honest services statute is under review by the U.S. Supreme Court, and Poole argues that the situation should be resolved by June. Waiting on the Supreme Court to act would likely "streamline" the trial, he argues.
The Supreme Court seems likely to substantially change that law. Catch up on that issue here (preview of the arguments) and here (after the arguments were in).
Poole's lawyer also says he has three other matters now scheduled for trial or appellate arguments in late March, mid-May and late September.
— J. Andrew Curliss


J. Andrew Curliss covered state and local politics and government for The News & Observer for more than a decade before joining the investigative team in December 2008.
Contact him at 




Comments
Easley and lawful
Mon, 02/08/2010 - 19:03 — dsspr1in the same breath create an oxymoron
The change is coming
Mon, 02/08/2010 - 17:10 — redriverIf emails are considered unreliable then why use them? this is only another ploy to once again swindle the public. Although it may be a legitimate legal question, it is no reason to hold up such an important case. The corruption that has existed in politics is finally making the news it deserves. Both parties have shown to not be trustworthy and have become marginalized to the point of most would rather have some alternative than these two parties. The democrats have surely lost their rights to hold any leadership positions in this state. I think the voters have awakened and the independant voters will hold the power from now on. The 2 party system is surely dying out and the question now is what will replace it. It is a shame we have wasted so much time, money, and energy dealing with this mess along with the incompetence in Washington at a time when we need leadership, there is none.
NIGERIAN CONSULATE eSWAMPLAND
Mon, 02/08/2010 - 16:54 — wheelofvoterDavid:
What does the issue of state employees deleting emails have to do with email fraud? 99.9% of deleted email were not fraudulent unless Easley is now working for the Nigerian CONSULATE. If so, I have some eSWAMPLAND in Southport to sell ya (hopefuly Easley's foreclosed estate)! Deleting emails is clearly a violation of state records retention. No state email should be deleted capriciously and en masse. All emails should all be considered valuable and relevant until proven otherwise. The days of dangling shiny objects to distract are over. Nice try, tho.
Libba
welcome to the 21st century, David
Mon, 02/08/2010 - 15:52 — fredwombleWith all due respect to you, Mr. McKnight, I doubt the good former governor would agree with your sentiment ("...Gov. Mike Easley did not view emails as constituting lawful official state government documents and communications..."). This is a novel way of distracting from the issue at hand, however, and for that, nice try. The emails are a small part of the evidence against Poole and I suspect the eventual evidence against Easley. The man used his position to enrich himself, laundered money and failed to complete basic ethics documents as required by law. Willful misrepresentation on top of using his office to influence regulators regarding projects he invested tens of thousands of dollars (illegally), and you argue that email is the problem? Good one.
As a citizen fed up with the hypocrisy, elitism and downright crooked nature of NC politics, I must say I wish Gov. Easley was taking advice from you.
E-mail is a reliable as the judge wants it to be.
Mon, 02/08/2010 - 15:31 — Taxpayer2008E-mail can be very reliable and has caught many a liar in state gov't.
Email Reliability
Mon, 02/08/2010 - 15:21 — proctorThe News & Observer was once known as "The Old Reliable," so perhaps the time has come for the newspaper to do an in-depth study of the reliability of email as an "official" form of communications. So many "email notifications" are sent out to North Carolina citizens these days that often turn out to be inaccurate, unauthentic as to purported source, or outright fraudulent.
Then there is the question of the technical capability of altering the content of emails in the process of sending or forwarded them. How many citizens have themselves personally had to deal with "email message" scams or have known other individuals who have had to contend with these untruthful "communications" from one source or another?
It is good that former Gov. Mike Easley did not view emails as constituting lawful official state government documents and communications, and therefore, the North Carolina General Assembly ought to face these issues directly in light of current email irregularities and act to declare that only properly printed and signed letters and certain other papers shall serve as official communications for all offices and departments of North Carolina state government.
David P. McKnight