Luzerne County Judges

By Terrie Morgan-Besecker tmorgan@timesleader.com
Law & Order Reporter   |   Terrie Morgan-Besecker on Facebook   |   @TLTerrieMorgan on Twitter

SCRANTON - A federal judge has denied pre-trial motions filed by former judges Michael Conahan and Mark Ciavarella that sought to dismiss the case against them and/or suppress evidence based on allegations of government misconduct.

Read more Luzerne County Judges articles

click image to enlarge

Former Luzerne County judges Mark Ciavarella, left, and Michael Conahan leave the Federal Courthouse in Scranton.

Times Leader file photo

Related headlines

• Ciavarella sentenced to 28 years in prison

Related Documents

Order denying recusal motion

Select images available for purchase in the
Times Leader Photo Store

In an order issued this afternoon, U.S. District Judge Edwin Kosik also denied motions that sought his recusal from the case and a change of venue.

The rulings are among several dozen Kosik is expected to make in the coming days or weeks regarding various legal challenges attorneys for Conahan and Ciavarella filed to the government’s case.

The former judges were indicted by a federal grand jury in September on 48 counts, including extortion, money laundering, bribery, wire fraud and other offenses.

Prosecutors say Conahan and Ciavarella improperly accepted more than $2.8 million from attorney Robert Powell and real estate developer Robert Mericle in exchange for rulings that benefited the PA Child Care and Western PA Child Care juvenile detention centers. Powell once co-owned the centers while Mericle built the facilities.

Kosik’s ruling primarily impacts Ciavarella, who is awaiting trial on all 48 counts. Conahan entered into a plea agreement in April 29 that calls for him to plead guilty to one count of racketeering conspiracy.

The ex-judges had sought to dismiss the indictment and/or to suppress incriminating statements that were recorded by Powell over several months in 2008.

Al Flora, Ciavarella’s attorney, said he could not comment on the rulings. Philip Gelso, Conahan’s attorney, did not immediately return a phone message seeking comment.

In court papers, the defense attorneys had argued the government engaged in misconduct when it utilized Powell as an informant despite knowing he was part of a joint defense agreement. Such agreements protect communications between persons and attorneys regarding defense strategies to potential criminal charges.

Powell was initially a target of the investigation along with Conahan and Ciavarella, but later agreed to cooperate with authorities. The defense argued Powell should have withdrawn from the defense agreement before recording the conversations.

The U.S. Attorney’s office maintained it acted properly because it formed a “taint” team consisting of persons not involved in the case. That team reviewed the recordings and redacted any privileged information before giving them to the prosecution team.

Prosecutors also argued that Conahan and Ciavarella were not entitled to any relief because they were not discussing defense strategies, but how to commit additional crimes, including perjuring themselves before the grand jury. That falls within an exception that negates any protection they might have been afforded by the defense agreement, prosecutors said.

Kosik sided with prosecutors, noting that partial transcripts of the recordings revealed no mention of defense strategies, only the discussion of committing new crimes.

“The government is correct in pointing out that there is no constitutionally protected right to such conversations under any circumstance,” Kosik said. “Nor is it a protected strategy to use the aforesaid means to attack the credibility of a witness who is acting as an intermediary of what the government characterizes as ‘kickbacks.’”

For the complete story read Wednesday's Times Leader.