The way Dean Reynold’s defense attorney sees it, court cases are similar to a diamond with many facets: if someone focuses only on the jewel’s flaws, they will see only the negative.
Conversely, if viewed on its totality, the diamond’s positive aspects will also come through.
Attorney, Barry Powers’ job is to bring other aspects to light in Reynolds’ 2019 public corruption conviction to convince a federal judge to vacate the sentence, a move that would result in a reduction of the ex-Clinton Township elected official’s 17-year prison term.
Powers, of the Clinton Township-based Cranbrook Law Group, says Reynolds’ initial lawyer chose not to have him testify during the trial. As a result, he said, the former trustee’s full story wasn’t heard by a judge.
“Basically, we’re saying Dean was wrongfully convicted,” Powers said Wednesday.
“There were many things said at the trial, that he never had his day in court. We’re saying there was exculpatory evidence as to what was presented to the judge and jury, and if given the chance, the judge will see Dean’s side of the story.”
Reynolds, a three-term township trustee, was indicted on federal bribery charges in 2016, the first in a series of multiple defendants caught up in a widespread corruption investigation that involved other Macomb County politicians and business owners trying to secure an $18 million trash-hauling contract.
After a jury trial in federal court in Port Huron, Judge Cleland in 2019 ordered the ex-trustee to serve 204 months behind bars on 10 counts of bribery, four counts of conspiracy to commit bribery and one count of obstruction of justice.
Reynolds had asked the United States Supreme Court for a review of his corruption convictions, which was denied. He is now trying to appeal various aspects of his case through the sentencing jurist, U.S. Judge Robert H. Cleland, hoping to convince the jurist to reconsider.
A 47-page motion seeking consideration was labeled too lengthy by federal prosecutors and did not comply with local attorneys practice, but Judge Cleland did not agree. He wrote that the motion was “at times wandering prolix” it was “capable to being understood” and should be “allowed to stand,” meaning he would allow Powers additional time to file a new one.
Refreshed motion
In mid-April, Powers filed a motion requesting an additional 90 days to file a new brief in support of the motion to vacate. He claimed the extra time was needed to make sure had an opportunity to consult with Reynolds despite continuing COVID-19 restrictions imposed by the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
During an in-person conference earlier this month with Powers and federal prosecutors to determine the status of the case, the judge told Powers he would not simply allow him to file an additional memorandum of law because his motion to vacate was already fully briefed.
Instead, Cleland presented two options: he could either rule on the existing briefing that had already been submitted or, in an alternative, he could allow Powers to file a refreshed version of his initial briefing on the motion to vacate that more concisely presented his argument, followed by a refreshed response
and a refreshed reply brief.
In an order filed last week, Cleland granted a motion for leave to file a legal memo on the matter and set a briefing schedule. The refreshed motion to vacate is due by Aug. 2 and limited to 50 pages in length. Federal prosecutors will have 28 days to respond and Powers will have until Sept. 13 to file a reply brief.
Gina Balaya, a spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, declined to comment on the move.
Second bite at the apple
The judge’s move to allow Powers to submit a refreshed motion gives Reynolds a “second bite at the apple,” according to his attorney. The first one was the 2019 trial where Reynolds was convicted.
“This is kind of like a do-over,” Powers said. “The problem is, there is not a lot of rules on how to proceed to begin and end. My reaction was the judge did something that was reasonable.”
Reynolds, who is serving his time at the Federal Corrections Institution in Milan, is hoping to convince a judge to set aside or correct his prison sentence.
Reynolds, 52, was accused of accepting bribes in connection with millions in township garbage, towing and engineering contracts. He demanded and took more than $150,000 in bribes in four separate bribery conspiracies involving four different government contracts, federal prosecutors said.
The former Clinton Township trustee was accused of accepting bribes of more than $75,000 in cash, $50,000 in free legal services for his divorce and an all-expenses paid trip to Disney World, including an eight-night stay in a deluxe room costing more than $600 per night, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
Among those doling out the bribes were former trash kingpin Charles Rizzo Jr. and towing titan Gasper Fiore. Rizzo is on the tail end of a five-year sentence while Fiore has done his time and was released.
According to court documents, Reynolds has raised a number of issues in his appeal including his claim that the judge miscalculated sentencing guidelines and erred in handing down a sentence that was “grossly disproportionate” in relation to other defendants. The “grossly disproportionate” penalty was more than three times higher than the longest other defendants have received.
Reynolds points to a number of factors that he says led to his not being able to fully participate in his defense including his financial troubles, pending divorce, and a preoccupation with his mother’s and his own health issues.
All of this happened in 2016 while Reynolds was running for office as a candidate in the Clinton Township supervisor’s race against longtime incumbent Robert Cannon.
According to Powers, that brings in a political scenario.
“When you’re campaigning for office, there’s a fine line between asking someone to contribute to your campaign and a bribe,” he said.
The U.S. Supreme Court has found there is a First Amendment issue when a candidate makes out loans to their campaign war chest.
Noting Rizzo, former head of GFL Environmental, was the bidder on Clinton Township’s garbage pickup contract anyway, Powers said he believes there wasn’t a bribe.
“Only when there is an actual quid pro quo, in other words, if I say I will vote for your contract and push my colleagues on the board to vote for you, if you give me money,” the attorney said. “Under that standard, we don’t think a bribe took place.”
Other issues that will be addressed in the refreshed brief will be violation of Reynold’s Constitutional rights, the Fifth (the right to due process) and Sixth amendments (the right to counsel).
Powers stressed he wasn’t being critical of Reynolds’ trial lawyer, Stephen Rabaut. The veteran criminal defense attorney told jurors the government’s case against his client was full of reasonable doubt. Their testimony, he argued, was based on the testimony of “thieves” and Rizzo — a “master manipulator” — while trying obtain special consideration for their cooperation in the prosecution.
Powers said he feels these are strong arguments for the judge to consider reducing or tossing the lengthy prison sentence.
“Dean Reynolds is a strong gentleman and he’s doing the best he can,” he said. “But after he held in jail after the trial, his mother died. He wasn’t allowed a chance to attend her funeral. His father is getting older and he has a son that is becoming a man.
“Life is passing him by.”
