Boggs’ lawyer: What does ‘residence’ mean?

Wednesday, Dec. 12, 2007 | 6:57 a.m.

The attorney for former County Commissioner Lynette Boggs, who has been charged with lying about where she lived, appears ready to pull out a legal dictionary to get the case dismissed.

In documents filed with the court before a hearing scheduled for Thursday at the Regional Justice Center, attorney Gabriel Grasso contends the district attorney's office failed to define "residence" when seeking an indictment from a grand jury. Grasso seeks to have a total of four charges against Boggs dismissed before the case reaches a trial in the spring.

Such motions are common but typically fail. And considering the mountain of evidence the prosecution has amassed against Boggs, this should be a tough case for the defense.

Boggs was charged in June with falsifying documents to make it appear she lived in her district, but there is video evidence that appears to indicate she did not. Part of Grasso's contention is that Boggs, who ultimately lost the November 2006 election, lived in her district when she filed her candidacy papers.

State law requires candidates to have lived in the district in which they are running for at least 30 days before the filing deadline.

But a private detective hired by two unions that have feuded with Boggs amassed six weeks' worth of video showing her picking up the newspaper, hauling out trash and spending nights at a home outside her district. It was not the home she listed in election filings.

A former campaign associate who lived in Boggs' district, Linda Ferris, has testified the then-county commissioner implored her to use that address to satisfy the residency requirement.

All of that may be null and void if a District Court judge accepts Grasso's argument that the state, in its statement to the grand jury, did not properly define what a "residence" is. Without such a definition, he said, the state cannot determine that the house Boggs appeared to be living in, which was not the house in her district, was illegitimate.

Grasso couldn't be reached for comment Tuesday.

Prosecutor Scott Mitchell, however, said under state law the state doesn't have to define what a residence is.

Grasso also maintains that Boggs did not intentionally provide false information in her campaign paperwork, thus rendering a charge of perjury baseless. Under this argument, a mistake does not render the document a fake.

The district attorney's office has cited case law that it says deems otherwise. "Any forgery of any document usually just has one or two words that are forged," Mitchell said. "The fact that the rest of the document is (seemingly accurate) doesn't make any difference at all."

Boggs, who now runs a Christian ministry, also has been charged with misusing political funds.

Her nanny, Kelly McLeod, said in a sworn statement that she received several payments from Boggs' campaign committee but never performed any political work for Boggs. Instead, McLeod said, she watched Boggs' two children from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. most weekdays.

Grasso acknowledged in his court filings that state law prohibits the use of campaign funds for personal use, but he added: "Unfortunately, there is no further definition of what would be considered personal use of campaign funds."

District Attorney David Roger said his office has provided a sufficient basis for the case to move to trial, scheduled for March 31.

"We feel we're on solid ground," he said.

If convicted, Boggs faces one to four years in prison on each of two perjury charges and one to five years behind bars on each of two false filing charges.

Discussion: 2 comments so far…

By notfoold

10/28/08 at 10:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

In re Mosley, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 94 (2004)

JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE- EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS, MISUSE OF
JUDICIAL LETTERHEAD, AND FAILURE TO RECUSE IN A TIMELY MANNER

Summary
This case is an appeal of the evidentiary findings of the Nevada Commission on Judicial
Discipline (Commission) on eleven different counts of an official complaint filed by a special
prosecutor against the Honorable Donald M. Mosley (Judge Mosley). The complaint listed
eleven inappropriate actions Judge Mosley allegedly committed from August of 1997 through
August 1999. The counts alleged that Judge Mosley:
Count I- Wrote a personal letter on official judicial letterhead to the
principal of his son s school in August 1999;
Count II- Wrote a personal letter on official judicial letterhead to the
principal of his son s school in February 1998;
Count III- Engaged in an ex parte conversation with friend Barbara Orcutt,
regarding the arrest and release of Robert D Amore in August 1999;
Count IV- Ordered the release of Robert D Amore on his own
recognizance, without notifying the district attorney s office, after the
police arrested D Amore on a bench warrant issued by a different district
court judge in August 1999;
Count V- Engaged in an ex parte telephone conversation with Catherine
Woolf, an attorney representing Joseph McLaughlin in a criminal case that
was assigned to Judge Mosley s chambers;
Count VI- Engaged in an ex parte conversation in his chambers with
attorney Woolf in August 1997;
Count VII- Engaged in an ex parte conversation with Woolf, McLaughlin
and McLaughlin s wife in August 1997;
Count VIII- Failed to recuse himself from McLaughlin s criminal case
until after Mrs. McLaughlin had testified in Judge Mosley s custody case;
Count IX- Communicated with McLaughlin s wife regarding
McLaughlin s incarceration;
Count X- Assisted McLaughlin s wife in obtaining the return of her
vehicle;
Count XI- Continued to communicate with McLaughlin and his wife after
recusing himself in McLaughlin s criminal case, the continued
communication creating an appearance that Judge Mosley was rewarding
the McLaughlins for assisting him in his custody dispute.

After a three-day evidentiary hearing, the Commission concluded that Judge Mosley
committed the violations admitted in Counts I, II, III, IV, VI, VII, and VIII, and dismissed
Counts V, IX, X, and XI. Judge Mosley was ordered to attend the first general ethics course at

Message created & sent from Corel WordPerfect Lightning - try it today for free at www.wordperfect.com/lightning !

http://www.lasvegassun.com/videos/sets/2...

http://www.lasvegassun.com/videos/2008/o...

http://www.lasvegassun.com/videos/sets/2...
By notfoold

10/28/08 at 10:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

In re Mosley, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 94 (2004)

JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE- EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS, MISUSE OF
JUDICIAL LETTERHEAD, AND FAILURE TO RECUSE IN A TIMELY MANNER

Summary
This case is an appeal of the evidentiary findings of the Nevada Commission on Judicial
Discipline (Commission) on eleven different counts of an official complaint filed by a special
prosecutor against the Honorable Donald M. Mosley (Judge Mosley). The complaint listed
eleven inappropriate actions Judge Mosley allegedly committed from August of 1997 through
August 1999. The counts alleged that Judge Mosley:
Count I- Wrote a personal letter on official judicial letterhead to the
principal of his son s school in August 1999;
Count II- Wrote a personal letter on official judicial letterhead to the
principal of his son s school in February 1998;
Count III- Engaged in an ex parte conversation with friend Barbara Orcutt,
regarding the arrest and release of Robert D Amore in August 1999;
Count IV- Ordered the release of Robert D Amore on his own
recognizance, without notifying the district attorney s office, after the
police arrested D Amore on a bench warrant issued by a different district
court judge in August 1999;
Count V- Engaged in an ex parte telephone conversation with Catherine
Woolf, an attorney representing Joseph McLaughlin in a criminal case that
was assigned to Judge Mosley s chambers;
Count VI- Engaged in an ex parte conversation in his chambers with
attorney Woolf in August 1997;
Count VII- Engaged in an ex parte conversation with Woolf, McLaughlin
and McLaughlin s wife in August 1997;
Count VIII- Failed to recuse himself from McLaughlin s criminal case
until after Mrs. McLaughlin had testified in Judge Mosley s custody case;
Count IX- Communicated with McLaughlin s wife regarding
McLaughlin s incarceration;
Count X- Assisted McLaughlin s wife in obtaining the return of her
vehicle;
Count XI- Continued to communicate with McLaughlin and his wife after
recusing himself in McLaughlin s criminal case, the continued
communication creating an appearance that Judge Mosley was rewarding
the McLaughlins for assisting him in his custody dispute.

After a three-day evidentiary hearing, the Commission concluded that Judge Mosley
committed the violations admitted in Counts I, II, III, IV, VI, VII, and VIII, and dismissed
Counts V, IX, X, and XI. Judge Mosley was ordered to attend the first general ethics course at

Message created & sent from Corel WordPerfect Lightning - try it today for free at www.wordperfect.com/lightning !

http://www.lasvegassun.com/videos/sets/2...

http://www.lasvegassun.com/videos/2008/o...

http://www.lasvegassun.com/videos/sets/2...

« Previous Ten Next Ten »

Live chat: Tuesday, noon PST; Chat with Krista Creelman; Problem Gambling Center executive director Krista Creelman will answer questions about gambling addiction from Las Vegas Sun readers from noon to 1 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. ... Submit question