JACKSONVILLE, Fla. – A jury convicted former JEA CEO Aaron Zahn last spring in connection with a proposed bonus plan tied to the potential sale of the city-owned utility, JEA.
Prosecutors alleged that the plan could have resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars in payouts if the sale had gone through.
When it first became public over five years ago, the scandal shook the city and JEA. Some have called it Jacksonville’s greatest scheme to defraud taxpayers.
However, attorneys for Zahn filed appeals on Tuesday night arguing that the federal government overreached on multiple aspects of his trial and that his indictment should be dismissed entirely.
RELATED: Former JEA CEO Aaron Zahn begins 4-year sentence in federal prison for wire fraud, conspiracy| Judge denies former JEA CEO Aaron Zahn’s request to remain free during appeals process | Former JEA CEO Aaron Zahn granted delay in deadline to report to prison because of hurricane damage to Tampa home
The key issues mentioned in the appeal are:
- Arguing that the federal government overreached because the “property” at issue (the money that would have been paid out in the bonuses instead of going to the city) never existed because the utility was never sold.
- Arguing that the federal government overreached in using a JEA meeting where the bonus plan was presented and live-streamed as a hook for wire fraud. Zahn’s attorneys argue that the livestream happened automatically, without regard to the scheme.
- Arguing that prosecutors persuaded the judge on “inaccurate jury instructions, which tipped the scales in its favor” – with the court refusing to give certain instructions related to Zahn’s defense arguments.
- Arguing that there are issues around a statement that Zahn gave to city attorneys in January 2020 while they were investigating whether or not he could be fired “for cause.” Because he was a public employee, he had what is known as “Garrity rights,” which means that if he’s compelled to speak to investigators, what he says can’t be used against him in a criminal case. His statements had been made public at the conclusion of the city investigation.
Curtis Fallgatter, a former federal prosecutor, says these arguments are not likely to hold up in court.
“Yes, the funds were never paid, but they were there,” Fallgatter explains. “We know there were huge numbers that they were bidding for, and of course, this is a conspiracy, so it’s an agreement to commit a crime. And if you and I decide we want to rob a bank, even if we don’t rob the bank, if we’ve agreed to do it and take steps to implement that crime, we’re still guilty of that conspiracy.”
In a separate argument, Zahn’s attorneys say prosecutors persuaded the judge on “inaccurate jury instructions tipping the scales in its favor” with the court refusing to give certain instructions related to Zahn’s defense arguments.
Fallgatter says the court isn’t going to buy that argument.
“One of those instructions is the one they’re challenging 18, USC, Section 666, that’s the federal bribery statute,” he notes. “The 11th Circuit has already said, ‘Here’s what you’re supposed to tell the jury so they’re swimming upstream.' Trying to say that the judge who followed the pattern jury instructions on the 11th Circuit should be reversed for following those instructions...The 11th Circuit is not going to buy that argument.”
Zahn’s appeal is now before the Atlanta-based 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. His attorneys have requested oral arguments but there is no set timetable for when that might happen.
Fallgatter estimates that a decision on the appeal will be reached in the next six to 12 months.
Zahn started serving his four-year sentence in late January at a federal prison in South Carolina.
