Connecticut Supreme Court hears appeal in former mayor's corruption case
By Richard Weizel
HARTFORD, Conn. (Reuters) - The attorney for former Hartford Mayor Eddie Perez urged the Connecticut Supreme Court on Tuesday to let stand a lower court's decision to overturn bribery and corruption convictions against Perez and order new trials.
State prosecutors are appealing the December 2013 Appellate Court decision made on the basis that the charges, accepting a contractor's bribe of home improvements and attempting to extort $100,000 from a developer, were improperly combined into a single trial.
Perez, a onetime gang leader who rose from poverty to become a community activist and, in 2001, mayor of Connecticut's capital city, resigned in 2010 after he was convicted. He was sentenced to three years in prison, but remained free on bail during his appeal.
His attorney, Hubert Santos, told the Supreme Court that by combining the charges into one trial, the jury was prejudiced against Perez.
Santos argued that because his client was forced to testify that he had lied in a police interview in connection with the bribery charge, the jury's opinion was tainted and jurors were swayed to convict him on the extortion charges without sufficient evidence.
"This was a case that, from the beginning, was doomed," he said.
Santos added that if two separate trials were held, he would call Perez to testify about his claims of innocence on the extortion charge, while advising him to decline to testify on the bribery charges.
"With one trial, that option was not on the table," he said.
State Assistant Attorney Harry Weller argued that the charges were properly combined to expedite the case.
"This was a high-profile defendant and the court determined these charges were properly and better-off combined into one trial," Weller told the justices. "Expediting such cases has always been an important consideration for this court."
Perez, wearing a gray suit and appearing reserved, declined to answer questions after the hearing.
Santos said he expects the Supreme Court to issued its ruling within six months.
(Reporting by Richard Weizel; Editing by Laila Kearney and Mohammad Zargham)
