Former Superior Court judge's bribery conviction vacated, new trial granted
By Ethan Smith
Published in News on February 23, 2017 3:43 PM
Jones
Former District 8-B Superior Court Judge Arnold O. Jones II's 2016 bribery conviction in federal court was overturned and a new trial granted today by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.
No date has been set for the new trial, U.S. Department of Justice Public Information Officer Don Connelly said.
Jones was tried and convicted in October 2016 for bribing Federal Bureau of Investigation Task Force Officer and Wayne County Sheriff's Deputy Matthew Miller with cases of beer and $100 in exchange for copies of text messages between Jones' wife and another man.
Connelly said the motion granting Jones a new trial vacates Jones' conviction on all three charges ---- paying bribes, paying gratuities and attempting to corruptly influence an official proceeding.
The court order granting a new trial was signed by today by judge Terrence W. Boyle.
Connelly said the motion requesting a new trial was filed Nov. 3, 2016, but he said he did not know why the motion for the new trial was just now granted.
"You know the case was reassigned to judge Boyle because judge (James) Fox's calendar was transferred to him," Connelly said. "I know of no reason myself other than what their (the defense team's) motion says."
One of Jones' attorneys, Geoff Hulse, said Jones' defense team -- comprised of Hulse, Elliott Abrams, Glenn Barfield and Joseph Cheshire -- had no comment at this time.
The defense team's motion for a new trial states the following:
• "First, Mr. Jones was deprived of his right to confront witnesses and challenge the government's proof because the Court prohibited Mr. Jones from cross-examining the government's key witness, Deputy Miller, on his bias and motives.
• Second, Mr. Jones was deprived of his right to put on a defense due to the Court's Order of October 19, 2016, which prohibited the defendant from challenging an essential element of the offenses.
• Third, a new trial is required based on statements by the Court to counsel for Mr. Jones, which were made in the presence of the jury.
• Fourth, a new trial is an appropriate alternative remedy for the legal errors raised in Mr. Jones' Rule 29(c) Motion for Judgment of Acquittal."
The judge that presided over the trial last year, James C. Fox, was removed from that case and others this January, for reasons not related to his handling of the trial, Connelly said.
This motion also grants the defense and prosecution the ability to file more motions in the case for 30 days.
"Any delay caused shall be excluded pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3161(h) as the ends of justice served outweigh the interests of the defendant and the public in a speedy trial," the motion granting a new trial said.
Jones' sentencing hearing was delayed from January to March after Fox was removed from the case, but Jones will now face trial a second time.
A three-count indictment was handed down against Jones on Nov. 3, 2015, and a superseding indictment that maintained the same corruption charges against Jones was handed down Aug. 23, 2016.
A month following his conviction, Jones lost his bid for re-election in November 2016, against current District 8-B Superior Court Judge Will Bland.
Bland won the Superior Court Judge seat from Jones with nearly 64 percent of the vote.