<!--Rick Pfeiffer--><table width="234" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" background="http://static.cnhi.zope.net/flashpromo/niagaragazette/images/byline_234x60.jpg" height="60"><tr><td><div align="center"><font size="3" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">By Rick Pfeiffer</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></font><font size="1" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="mailto:rick.pfeiffer@niagara-gazette.com">rick.pfeiffer@niagara-gazette.com</a></font></div></td></tr></table>
A ruling by a federal magistrate, denying the effort of former Falls Mayor Vince Anello to have public corruption charges against him thrown out is “clearly erroneous and contrary to law.”
That charge is leveled in a filing made in U.S. District Court on Wednesday by Anello’s defense team. The former mayor’s lawyers are asking U.S. District Court Judge William Skretny not to adopt recommendations made by U.S. Magistrate Judge Jeremiah McCarthy that would deny Anello’s move to have a multi-count federal indictment against him dismissed.
In late July, McCarthy rejected arguments that prosecutors failed to properly lay out their case against the former mayor in the indictment and dismissed defense claims the charges are unconstitutional.
Anello is charged with single felony counts of conspiracy and obstruction and two counts of scheme to deprive honest services. The charges stem from his dealings with Tuscarora businessman and developer Joseph Anderson and three loans that Anello received from him.
The former mayor has claimed the checks represented “interest-free loans” from Anderson to his electrical contracting business. Prosecutors charge Anderson gave Anello the loans so he could become “a player” in development projects in the Falls.
In his request to Skretny, defense attorney Joel Daniels makes many of the same arguments he made to McCarthy. Among them, that prosecutors fail, in the indictment, to show a quid pro quo between Anello and Anderson.
Daniels has maintained there is no proof Anello took the loans from Anderson in return for his influence in getting the businessman a favorable lease for the city’s East Pedestrian Mall. Prosecutors argued, and McCarthy agreed, that they don’t need to provide proof of anything before the case goes to trial.
“The indictment alleges (Anello) had ‘potential motivation’ to help Joe Anderson,”’ Daniels writes in the filing. “That may be the government’s best guess but ... speculation, surmise or assumptions don’t cut it; there must be some form of an actual understanding between these parties.”
Daniels also makes the claim, again, that the honest services charges against Anello are so broad they are unconstitutional.
Prosecutors contend the loans Anello received from Anderson, totaling $40,000, deprived “the city of the intangible right of the honest services of a public official” because he took the loans while Anderson was doing business with the city and failed to disclose the loans as required by the city’s Ethics Law.
Anderson has pleaded guilty to a single count of scheme to deprive and is currently free on his own recognizance. Skretny has delayed sentencing for Anderson because he’s cooperating with federal prosecutors.
At a hearing during the last week of July, government lawyers said Anderson was “still cooperating” with them and asked for the delay. A status conference on Anderson’s sentencing had now been set for Oct. 29.
