Don Hill fights back against convictions

New trial denied, but Judge considering two key motions in Don Hill’s appeal

hile former mayor pro tem Don Hill was formally denied a new trial in a Nov. 30 hearing, he saw rays of hope when federal judge Barbara Lynn did delay two critical rulings that  prevents total closure on Hill’s and the other defendant’s convictions.

In a statement sent by Hill through his publicist, he stated:

“I have sought to explain to you the importance of this day because Sheila and I intend to continue our fight against these charges; we maintain that we are innocent of these charges.

“Some say that we should just take our punishment. They ridicule our faith and would deny us any appeal. However, the parable of the persistent widow in Luke 18 teaches us that we must pray and not give up! This is what we intend to do!”

Judge Lynn delayed the motion by Hill’s defense team to throw out the convictions against Hill, wife Sheila and D’Angelo Lee, the former Planning and Zoning commissioner appointed by Hill, on the charge of premeditatedly committing “honest services fraud.”

“In her decisions today, the Judge ruled tentatively that she would grant our Motion to acquit or find Sheila and I "not guilty," of depriving the citizens of "honest services,” Hill said. “She stated that she may delay a final decision on this issue pending a resolution by the United States Supreme Court which is now considering three cases on this same issue of the constitutionality of the ‘honest services’ statute.”

Next week, the Supreme Court will begin deliberations on two cases involving the honest services statue involving a newspaper owner charged with embezzlement and a former Alaskan state representative charged with mail fraud. They’ll also hear the case of Jeffrey Skilling, the former CEO of Enron, sometimes next year. Decisions on these cases are expected to be made early next year, but could take several months.

Lynn also delayed a decision on the defense’s motion to throw out the “money laundering” convictions, also waiting for a future Supreme Court ruling on that point.

“All indications are that she is leaning toward an acquittal on this issue as well, but her uncertainty in the law is caused by some confusion in prior appellate decisions on this issue,” Hill said in his statement. He further assessed that the highly complex rulings within the federal charges against him and his defendants possibly handcuffed the jury, causing them to lean toward guilty findings.

“Both of these decisions demonstrate the difficult job the jury confronted,” Hill said. “Heartening to me was her statement from the bench today that the Jury found that the Government did not prove I received any money from anyone, which was acknowledged by the Government lawyers.

“I was also encouraged by the Judge's decision that I did not engage in dishonest services as a Dallas City Councilman. I performed my duties as great personal sacrifice in an honest and transparent way.”

Don and Sheila Hill and three other defendants were found guilty on Oct. 5 of bribery, extortion, conspiracy, money laundering and the deprivation of the Citizens of Dallas of "honest services". The charges involved alleged activities by Hill, as a city councilman, in working with Southwest Housing Development Company and its owner Brian Potashnik in bringing low and moderate-income housing to southern Dallas neighborhoods. Brian and wife Cheryl Postashnik took a plea bargain with prosecutors for testifying evidence against Hill. In regards to Postashnik, Hill stated:

“There remains three charges based primarily on the testimony of Potasnik and Fisher. We believe that on appeal, our sufficiency of the evidence arguments will be successful. Potasnik never complained to anyone about any pressure from me to give a contract to Sheila or anybody else. He was given a very favorable plea deal on the Sunday before trial to testify against me and when he was initially questioned by the FBI on June 20,2005 as well as when he was formally charged in October 2007,he stated that he was not a victim of bribery or extortion!

“In the testimony of Fisher, I only talked to him one time and I made it very clear in that conversation heard many times at trial that he was under no pressure or obligation to hire any minority contractor!”

Hill further stated: “These Motions or Requests of the Judge to enter Judgments of Acquittal in our case are very significant because the decisions by the Judge shape and sharpen our appeal and possibly sentencing.”