By Max Mitchell, From The Legal Intelligencer

A jury has found retired Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Willis W. Berry Jr. guilty on charges of theft of services and conflict of interest related to his running a real estate business out of his judicial chambers.

The 12-member jury handed up the unanimous verdict Wednesday afternoon after less than two hours of deliberation. The jury additionally found that Berry’s theft exceeded $2,000.

A tentative sentencing date has been set for early October.

According to Deputy Attorney General Daniel J. Dye, the theft-of-services charge carries a possible sentence of up to seven years of incarceration, while the conflict-of-interest charge is much lighter and could result in probation. Dye also said he will seek an “appropriate amount” of restitution at sentencing.

“Philadelphia took a piece of its city back,” Dye said after the verdict was rendered.

When asked for comment immediately following the verdict, Berry shrugged and said, “The jury has spoken.”

Berry’s attorneys, W. Fred Harrison Jr. and Nino V. Tinari, said they plan to appeal the verdict to the state Superior Court.

Harrison also said he felt that a signed agreement Berry made with the Judicial Conduct Board acknowledging that he had allowed his secretary to operate some of his property rental business from his judicial office likely swayed the jury.

The state’s “evidence was minimal at best,” Harrison said.

During closing arguments Wednesday morning, Harrison had tried to distance the facts of the case from the signed stipulation with the Judicial Conduct Board. In 2009, Berry had been suspended by the Court of Judicial Discipline for four months after the Judicial Conduct Board reviewed his use of Philadelphia County employees for nonjudicial activities.

Harrison noted the signed statement did not specify when the secretary allegedly performed these duties, such as during her lunch hour or after work.

Harrison also argued the testimony from witnesses during the trial conflicted with the idea that the secretary often worked during business hours.

“See whether those stipulations entered into many moons ago comport with the evidence,” Harrison said to the jury. “I submit it does not.”

Dye, however, had pointed to the stipulation as an admission that Berry broke the law. An admission with the judicial disciplinary body should be an admission for criminal purposes as well, Dye argued.

“What chills me is … this idea that you’re going to go to one place and say one thing … and then say, ‘Well, that was over here,'” Dye said. “Truth doesn’t change in 10 years.”

According to testimony, the state’s investigation into Berry was prompted by the Judicial Conduct Board’s 2007 review of Berry’s use of judicial resources. An agent with the Attorney General’s Office testified Tuesday that state agents used the investigating materials uncovered by the Judicial Conduct Board to build the prosecution’s case.

During closing arguments, Harrison also pointed to the time lapse between when the stipulation was signed and when the state brought criminal charges.

Attorney General “Kathleen Kane is bringing these charges seven years later,” Harrison said. “Think about it.”

At the time Berry was suspended, Philadelphia District Attorney Lynne Abraham declined to prosecute Berry criminally, saying that if there was not enough evidence to remove him from the bench, there was not enough evidence to convict him criminally.

Dye responded during his closing argument that the defense was trying to create an “insinuation” with its comments about Kane.

“I don’t want the illusion created that somehow we’re creating a double standard,” Dye said, noting that it is possible Kane may face criminal charges over allegedly leaking confidential grand jury information. “No one is above the law. I don’t care if it’s my boss or not.”

Berry’s trial began Monday in front of Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas Senior Judge S. Gerald Corso, who was brought in as an out-of-county judge specially assigned to the case.

The complaint against Berry alleged the ex-judge directed his former secretary, Carolyn Fleming, to maintain files, correspond with tenants by phone and in person at the Criminal Justice Center in Philadelphia, prepare and file legal documents including leases and eviction complaints, appear at landlord-tenant proceedings, advertise properties in newspapers, engage in bookkeeping, pay bills and make bank deposits all on official time.

Fleming worked as Berry’s judicial secretary from the time he took office as a judge in 1996 until 2007. Berry’s charges allege that he diverted roughly $110,880 over the approximately 10-year period to pay her.

Fleming testified Tuesday that she spent around two-and-a-half hours a day dealing with tenants, handling utility bills and procuring leases. She also said that she would occasionally spend additional time going to the municipal courthouse to handle landlord-tenant disputes, and licensing and inspection issues.

However, attorneys for Berry have contended that Fleming “siphoned off” about $44,000 from Berry during her time as his secretary. The attorneys said that she had access to his checkbook, and forged his signature.

During opening arguments Monday, defense attorney Tinari had said Fleming went to the Judicial Conduct Board after Berry confronted her about taking his money.

“It’s a matter of retaliation against the good judge,” Tinari said. “There’s no doubt that hell has no fury like a woman scorned.”

Harrison on Wednesday further told the jury that Fleming was “a corrupt and polluted source.”

“You are to look at that testimony with disfavor,” Harrison said.

Dye countered that, even if Fleming was taking money from Berry, the former judge still admitted that Fleming had run his real estate business out of his judicial office.

“Perhaps hell should have no fury like when the people of Philadelphia are scorned,” Dye said.

For more on this story go to: http://www.thelegalintelligencer.com/id=1202732798548/ExJudge-Found-Guilty-of-Theft-Conflict-of-Interest#ixzz3grjPLpwF