Court Upholds Verdict Against Ex-Drexel Aide : Brokerage: Lisa Ann Jones’ perjury conviction is upheld, but her prison sentence is thrown out on appeal.

A federal appeals court on Friday upheld the perjury conviction of Lisa Ann Jones, a former Drexel Burnham Lambert Inc. trading assistant in Beverly Hills. But the court threw out her 18-month prison sentence, ruling that a district court judge had applied new federal sentencing guidelines incorrectly.

The case will be sent back to U.S. District Judge Leonard B. Sand for resentencing. Lawyers said it is likely the new sentence will be shorter, but they said the appellate court ruling wasn’t specific.

Jones was convicted in August, 1989, of five counts of perjury and two counts of obstruction of justice for lying to a federal grand jury about the role of several Drexel executives in an illegal stock “parking” scheme. A three-judge panel of the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a claim that the lawyer who represented her during her trial hadn’t represented her effectively because a prosecutor had threatened him with disciplinary proceedings.

The appellate judges ruled that Jones’ lawyer didn’t have a real conflict of interest and wasn’t improperly influenced by threats from prosecutors.

Jones remains free on bail. The lawyer who handled her appeal, Daniel H. Bookin of San Francisco, declined to comment on the ruling. He said he and Jones haven’t decided yet whether to pursue the appeal further by asking the appeals court for a rehearing. No date has been set for the resentencing.

The appeals court found that Judge Sand had improperly applied the new sentencing guidelines when he added several months to Jones’ sentence because he found that she had “substantially interfered with the administration of justice.” The appeals court ruled that there wasn’t any evidence that her perjury had actually substantially interfered with the government’s investigation or caused it to spend substantially more time and money on the case. Lawyers said Sand might hold a hearing on that issue or might simply impose a shorter sentence.

Jones’ friends have portrayed her as a scapegoat in the government’s drive to prosecute Drexel and several of the firm’s customers. But prosecutors have noted that she was repeatedly told that she could be prosecuted for lying to the grand jury and was given several opportunities to change her testimony, which she declined.