Court Edict Prompts Moriarty to Challenge Conviction

Former Anaheim fireworks manufacturer W. Patrick Moriarty moved Friday to set aside his conviction and five-year sentence on a variety of political corruption charges, claiming his conduct was not illegal under the federal mail fraud statute.

The motion is one of the more significant results so far of a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that severely limits the applicability of mail fraud laws in political corruption cases and raises doubts about Moriarty’s 1985 conviction on seven counts of mail fraud.

Citing the June 24 decision, Moriarty’s lawyer, Jan Lawrence Handzlik, filed a motion with U.S. District Judge William J. Rea, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction to convict Moriarty under the new interpretation of the law.

Kentucky Case Cited

Ruling in a Kentucky political corruption case, the high court concluded that federal mail fraud laws apply only when prosecutors can prove that the public lost money, not just its intangible right to the honest and impartial services of its representatives.

Three of the seven mail fraud counts to which Moriarty pleaded guilty stem from giving secret shares in the California Commerce Club to four city officials in return for their granting a license for the gambling club.

The others charged him with making illegal contributions to politicians all over the state and paying kickbacks to a bank official. Racketeering charges included in the original indictment were dropped in connection with the guilty plea.

Moriarty’s conviction was a milestone in one of the most significant political corruption cases in the state’s history.

Wide Corruption Probe

The testimony of the former Red Devil “safe and sane” fireworks manufacturer has led to the convictions on corruption charges of three former California politicians--Norwalk Assemblyman Bruce E. Young, Long Beach City Councilman James Wilson and Carson City Councilman Walter (Jake) Egan--and Moriarty has pledged to cooperate in further investigations.

“By this motion, we are saying that Mr. Moriarty did not violate the mail fraud statute, and that’s basically it,” Handzlik said. “He was accused of schemes to deprive various entities of intangible rights. The Supreme Court has said that the mail fraud statute doesn’t cover those kinds of schemes.”

Chief Assistant U.S. Atty. Richard E. Drooyan did not say whether the government would refile racketeering charges against Moriarty should the judge agree to vacate all or some of the mail fraud counts against him.

“At this time, we don’t have any response,” Drooyan said. “We will file a response in court, if the court orders us to do so.”

But Handzlik said he “would expect to enter into discussions with the government concerning some sort of disposition or settlement” of the case, perhaps including a plea to different charges, should the motion be granted.

Declines to Speculate

“That is something we would have to give consideration to at the time, but it is premature to speculate on the outcome of the motion,” he said.

Handzlik said he did not expect the mail fraud issue to affect Moriarty’s cooperation in the continuing investigation of other political officials with ties to Moriarty.