A Texas judge
refused to dismiss a felony abuse-of-power case against Rick
Perry on constitutional grounds, ruling that criminal charges against
the possible 2016 presidential candidate should stand.
In 44 pages of decisions and orders, District Judge
Bert Richardson, who like Perry is a repugican, rejected calls from
Perry’s pricy defense team to toss the case because its client was
acting within his rights as chief executive of America’s second-most
populous state when he publicly threatened, then carried out, a 2013
veto of state funding for public corruption prosecutors.
Richardson wrote that, “Texas law clearly precludes a
trial court from making a pretrial determination regarding the
constitutionality of a state penal or criminal procedural statute as the
statue applies to a particular defendant.”
Perry was the longest-serving governor in Texas
history but chose not to seek re-election last year and left office Jan.
20. He is seriously considering a second run for pretender after his
2012 White House bid flamed out in a series of public gaffes, however,
and says he may announce a final decision as soon as May.
Perry has spent more than $1.1 million of his
campaign funds on his defense — and Richard’s ruling means it will
likely continue for several more months at least.
David Botsford, one of Perry’s defense attorneys,
said the legal team had filed a notice of appeal. Another attorney, Tony
Buzbee, issued a statement saying that the former governor “acted
lawfully and properly exercised his power under the law” and that his
continued prosecution “is an outrage and sets a dangerous precedent in
our Democracy.”
Perry was indicted in August on charges of abuse of
official power and coercion of a public servant. He is accused of
publicly threatening — then making good on — the veto of $7.5 million in
state funding for a public corruption division within the office of
Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg. That came after
Lehmberg, a Democrat whose county includes Austin, rebuffed Perry’s
calls to resign following a conviction and jail time for drunken
driving.
Texans for Public Justice, watchdog
group based in Austin, raised concerns that gave rise to the criminal
case. The group’s executive director, Craig McDonald, released a
statement saying, “The prosecutor and a grand jury have said
there’s compelling evidence against Perry. That evidence should be
presented in court for all to see. The chances of that happening
improved today.”
In a 60-page motion filed in August, Perry’s
attorneys had said the law being used to prosecute him is
unconstitutionally vague and decried “attempts to convert inescapably
political disputes into criminal complaints.”
Richardson did rule that one of the charges against Perry was vague, but he gave the state time to correct it.
A grand jury in Austin — a liberal enclave in
otherwise largely wingnut Texas — indicted Perry. If convicted, the
former governor faces a maximum 109 years in prison. Perry calls the
matter a political witch hunt and says he would issue the veto again if
given the chance. When he was booked and fingerprinted, Perry smirked in
his mug shot — then tweeted about going for ice cream.
Top national repugicans initially lined up to
praise Perry and decry the criminal charges against him — but they’ve
been less vocal about their support as the case drags on.
An exception was fellow TexanTed
Cruz, who’s also mulling a pretender run. The teabagger darling called Perry “a good man, a man of integrity, and a
friend.”
“The district court’s decision to allow this case to
proceed is both unfortunate and wrong, and it profoundly undermines the
rule of law,” Cruz said in a statement.
Richardson had previously refused to toss the case
on a series of technicalities Perry’s lawyers raised, including
questioning whether the special prosecutor assigned to the case, San
Antonio attorney Michael McCrum, was properly sworn in.
McCrum has said from the start that the case is stronger than it may outwardly appear, and that it should be heard by a jury.
No comments:
Post a Comment