South Texas State Court Judge Convicted of Bribery

A South Texas jury on Thursday found 13th Court of Appeals Justice Rudy Delgado guilty of eight federal charges related to judicial bribery allegations.

The jury in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas found Delgado guilty of conspiracy to commit bribery concerning programs receiving federal funds, obstruction of justice, three counts of federal program bribery and three counts of Travel Act violations.

Delgado’s attorney, Michael McCrum, owner of McCrum Law Office in San Antonio, confirmed the guilty verdict. He said Delgado plans to appeal, and declined to comment further. Angela Dodge, a spokeswoman of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Texas, also confirmed the verdict.

“The bribery of a judge may be the worst break of the public’s trust in government,” said U.S. Attorney Ryan Patrick of the Southern District of Texas, in a statement. “Rudy Delgado used his position to enrich himself. He didn’t just tip the scales of justice, he knocked it over with a wad of cash and didn’t look back. Delgado’s actions unfairly tarnish all his former colleagues.”

https://www.law.com/texaslawyer/2019/07/11/guilty-judge-rudy-delgado-convicted-on-all-counts-in-judicial-bribery-case/

Officer Involved Shooting in Kerrville

Last week a Kerrville police officer fatally shot a 17 year old man named Tommy Hranicky who refused to drop a knife. Details are sketchy but based on the news reports I think it was a justifiable shooting. If the decedent’s survivors are thinking about filing a law suit they will have an uphill battle. Just looking at a picture in the Kerrville Daily Times, Tommy looks like a nut. 

According to police, Hranicky approached the officer while threatening him with the knife. After backing up and issuing multiple commands to stop and drop the knife, the officer fired his sidearm, authorities said.

In a somewhat similar case, Andrew Kisala v. Amy Hughes, 584 U.S. ___ (2018) the Supreme Court held that an officer was justified in shooting a woman who refused to drop a knife. She was on the other side of a fence and not approaching the officers.

Citing precedent, the court said that the question of whether an officer used excessive force hinges on the specifics of each case, including whether the suspect posed an immediate threat, and that the reasonableness of a use of force must be judged from the officer’s perspective. Officers were entitled to qualified immunity as long as no similar precedent existed showing a specific use of force was unlawful.

In Graham v. Connor, 490 U. S. 386, 396 (1989), the Court held that the question whether an officer has used excessive force “requires careful attention to the facts and circumstances of each particular case, including the severity of the crime at issue, whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and whether he is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight.” “The ‘reasonableness’ of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with 20/20 vision of hindsight.” Ibid. And “[t]he calculus of reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments—in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving—about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation.” Id., at 396–397. 

Houston Attorney Convicted of Offshore Tax Evasion Scheme Conspired to Repatriate More Than $18 Million in Untaxed Money Held in Foreign Banks

from DOJ press release 9/6/19

A Houston, Texas, attorney was convicted today of one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States and three counts of tax evasion, announced Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Richard E. Zuckerman of the Department of Justice’s Tax Division and U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick for the Southern District of Texas.

According to the evidence presented at trial, Jack Stephen Pursley, also known as Steve Pursley, conspired with a former client to repatriate more than $18 million in untaxed income that the client had earned through his company, Southeastern Shipping. Knowing that his client had never paid taxes on these funds, Pursley designed and implemented a scheme whereby the untaxed funds were transferred from Southeastern Shipping’s business bank account, located in the Isle of Man, to the United States. Pursley helped to conceal the movement of funds from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) by disguising the transfers as stock purchases in United States corporations owned and controlled by Pursley and his client.

At trial, the government proved that Pursley received more than $4.8 million and a 25% ownership interest in the co-conspirator’s ongoing business for his role in the fraudulent scheme. For tax years 2009 and 2010, Pursley evaded the assessment of and failed to pay the income taxes he owed on these payments by, among other means, withdrawing the funds as purported non-taxable loans and returns of capital. The government showed at trial that Pursley used the money he garnered from the fraudulent scheme for personal investments, and to purchase assets for himself, including a vacation home in Vail, Colorado and property in Houston, Texas.

Judge Lynn Hughes has set sentencing for Dec. 9. Pursley faces a statutory maximum sentence of five years in prison for the conspiracy count, and five years in prison for each count of tax evasion. He also faces a period of supervised release, monetary penalties, and restitution.

Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Zuckerman and U.S. Attorney Patrick commended special agents of IRS-Criminal Investigation, who investigated the case, and Trial Attorneys Sean Beaty, Grace Albinson, and Jack Morgan of the Tax Division, who prosecuted this case.

More Funny Things Indigent Criminal Defendants Say to Their Lawyers

Here's a recent one: Ex-con Danny Defendant is charged with continuous sexual assault of his young daughter, and 20 counts of possession of child porn. He's already done time for drug offenses so getting on the witness stand may not be a good idea. Never mind, he tells his lawyer to tell the DA and judge he wants probation because he is a good Christian man. In fact, in their first interview he brought his Bible to the attorney visitation room and asked "Mr. Lawyer, are you a Christian?"

 Now he wants new counsel because current lawyer won't "fight to get him an awesome deal."