Source: Reuters
Pubdate: 10 Jul 1998
Author: Robert Boczkiewicz

APPEALS COURT STAYS LENIENCY RULING

DENVER (Reuters) - The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Friday postponed a
controversial new ruling barring federal prosecutors from promising
leniency to cooperative witnesses in criminal cases.

The Denver-based court unexpectedly stayed last week's ruling by a
three-judge appellate panel, one day after the Justice Department said it
would ask the full U.S. appeals court to reverse the ruling which might
affect many convictions, including those in the Oklahoma City bombing case.

Friday's order said the court was acting on its own initiative to
indefinitely postpone the effective date of the ruling until all 12 judges
of the court can reconsider the decision that was issued by the three-judge
panel.

The July 1 ruling said it was illegal for federal prosecutors to offer
leniency in exchange for testimony. It led to a backlash from prosecutors,
members of Congress and editorial writers because of its negative effect on
law enforcement.

"The appeal will be set for oral argument during the November session of
the court," the court said in a two-page order.

The ruling applied only to the six states of the 10th Circuit, which covers
Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming, but the Justice
Department did not want it to be adopted by appeals courts in other parts
of the country.

Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder said it was difficult to say whether
the ruling would affect the appeals of Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols,
who were convicted in the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 that killed 168
people.

A key witness in the case, Michael Fortier, testified after reaching a plea
deal with prosecutors that promised him leniency.

Several members of Congress said they would propose legislation to overturn
the ruling.

The panel's ruling had an immediate effect in some states because trials
were approaching in cases in which prosecutors said their cases were
dependent on testimony based on agreements that would be illegal under the
new decision.

- ---
Checked-by: Mike Gogulski