Computergate Conviction Leads To Consent Disbarment
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has accepted the consent disbarment of an attorney convicted in the so-called Computergate matter.
Matt Miller of pennlive reported on the conviction and appeal in September 2013
The state Superior Court refused on Wednesday to overturn the criminal convictions and 4- to 12-year prison sentence of former state Rep. Brett O. Feese in the so-called Computergate scandal.
In a 53-page ruling, a court majority rejected Feese’s claims that prosecutors from the state Attorney General’s Office committed misconduct and prejudiced his case by destroying raw notes of witness interviews and that they had failed to prove that he had broken the law.
The 59-year-old Feese, who was also the former director of the House Republican Campaign Committee and chief counsel for the House Republican Caucus, was one of only two of nine Computergate defendants to go to trial in Dauphin County Court. The others entered guilty pleas.
Feese was convicted of 40 charges, including theft, obstruction of the administration of law and conspiracy, after a 23-day trial in October 2011. Besides his prison term, he was ordered to pay $1 million in restitution and a $25,000 fine.
Feese, who once represented Lycoming County, and the other Computergate defendants were charged with using state-paid computer resources and employees to abet GOP political campaigns from 2000 to 2007.
Other Republicans who pleaded guilty to Computergate charges included former House Speaker John Perzel, who received a 2 1/2 to 5-year prison term and the same restitution order as Feese.
In denying Feese’s appeal, the Superior Court found “too speculative” his accusations that prosecutors had acted in bad faith and skewed the outcome of the case by destroying the raw witness interview notes.
Prosecutors denied the allegations, saying the notes were destroyed under a long-standing policy of the attorney general’s office and that the witness statements from those notes were transcribed in reports to which Feese’s lawyer, Joshua Lock, had access.
Feese’s argument about the note destruction did gain some traction with Superior Court Senior Judge James J. Fitzgerald III. In a dissenting opinion, Fitzgerald concluded that a hearing should have been held regarding the allegation that prosecutors had violated their own guidelines for destroying notes.
Lock is making the same arguments regarding the note destruction in a federal lawsuit he is pursuing on Feese’s behalf against the Computergate prosecutors and Gov. Tom Corbett.
Meanwhile, Feese is serving his sentence in the state prison at Waymart.
(Mike Frisch)