Skip to content
News
Link copied to clipboard

Judge allows Sprague to defend Fumo

Any potential conflicts of interest "can be cured," the judge wrote. The ruling keeps the case on track for Feb.

State Sen. Vincent J. Fumo
State Sen. Vincent J. FumoRead more

A federal judge ruled yesterday that State Sen. Vincent J. Fumo, who faces 139 charges of federal fraud and obstruction of justice, can keep Richard A. Sprague as his lawyer.

The decision means the scheduled trial of one of Pennsylvania's most powerful politicians will continue to be defended by one of Philadelphia's most prominent and aggressive lawyers.

It also means the high-profile trial is likely to proceed as scheduled for February. If Sprague had been disqualified, the case would have been delayed for months while Fumo found new counsel.

During the four-year federal investigation, Sprague and his law firm represented not only Fumo, but also three entities prosecutors ultimately labeled as victims of the senator's alleged crimes: the state Senate and two nonprofits, Citizens' Alliance for Better Neighborhoods and the Independence Seaport Museum.

In a 54-page ruling yesterday, Senior U.S. District Judge William H. Yohn Jr. said that "these conflicts can be cured . . . and do not overcome the constitutionally mandated presumption that a defendant is entitled to counsel of choice."

To retain the firm of Sprague & Sprague in the case, Yohn said, Fumo must appear in court and waive any potential conflicts of interests. The judge set a hearing for Sept. 28.

"I must satisfy myself that Fumo understands the intricacies and gravity of the conflicts, and will knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waive those conflicts in order to continue to be represented by the Sprague firm," Yohn said.

Mark Sheppard, a Sprague & Sprague lawyer, said Fumo is "pleased that he will be able to proceed with the counsel of his choice." The firm, he said, is "gratified that the court rejected the government's allegations of any wrongdoing by the senator's attorneys, or that we did anything improper or unethical."

Assistant U.S. Attorney John J. Pease, who had argued that Sprague controlled what the alleged victims told the FBI, declined to comment yesterday.

Fumo is charged with using Senate employees for personal and political tasks and with defrauding Citizens' Alliance on a grand scale - allegedly using more than $1 million of its money to furnish homes that the Philadelphia Democrat keeps in the city, at the Shore, and on a farm near Harrisburg.

He is also charged with defrauding the museum and with obstruction of justice for allegedly trying to thwart the FBI and IRS investigation by engaging in a cover-up.

Fumo has said that he is innocent and that the indictment is politically inspired by Republicans at the Justice Department. He resigned from several key government posts after his indictment but remains one of the state's most influential senators.

Three former Fumo aides - Ruth Arnao, Mark C. Eister and Leonard P. Luchko - are also charged.

The complex case involves hundreds of thousands of documents and more than 300 witnesses. The indictment alone runs 267 pages, and the trial is expected to last four months.

In his ruling yesterday, Yohn agreed with Fumo that disqualifying Sprague & Sprague would create an enormous hardship because the Sprague lawyers had spent years working on the case, even conducting a parallel investigation alongside the FBI and IRS probe.

Yohn said that Sprague's representation of the museum was too short to be consequential and that the firm's representation of certain Senate offices would not compromise the case.

"There was no evidence that attorneys from the Sprague firm learned confidential information in the course of that representation of the [Senate offices] that could, in the course of vigorously defending Fumo, either prejudice the Senate or its employees," Yohn said.

Yohn called the Sprague firm's representation of Citizens' Alliance by firm lawyer Geoffrey Johnson "more problematic."

But the judge said: "There was no suggestion of any specific area of knowledge that Johnson might have learned of confidences from Citizens' Alliance that . . . would be impermissible for the Sprague firm to use in the cross-examination of Citizens' Alliance witnesses, thus affecting the ability to defend Fumo vigorously."