Pubdate: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 Source: Associated Press Copyright: 1999 Associated Press Author: Bob Egelko, Associated Press Writer COURT GRANTS NEW HEARING FOR PRISONER WHOSE CODEFENDANT BRIBED JUROR SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- A Los Angeles man who has been in prison since 1988 for cocaine convictions is entitled to a hearing on whether the verdict against him was affected when his codefendant tried to bribe a juror, a federal appeals court ruled Friday. Michael Dutkel's conviction should be set aside unless prosecutors can prove that the bribe did not affect his case, said the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Dutkel could then be tried again on the same charges. Dutkel is serving a 15-year sentence for conspiracy and possession of about 22 pounds of cocaine. He allegedly tried to sell the drug to an undercover agent in the San Fernando Valley in April 1988. The jury deadlocked, with one of 12 jurors voting for acquittal, on whether to convict a second defendant, Eugene D. Washington. After his second trial also ended in a hung jury, Washington pleaded guilty to lesser charges and was sentenced to five years in prison. Before his release, however, he was convicted of jury tampering and sentenced to 12 more years in prison. Two men testified that, during the first trial, they approached the juror who later voted for acquittal. They told him the "white guy" (Dutkel) was guilty and the "black guy" (Washington) was innocent. The two men promised the juror cash, a job and a new car if he voted to acquit Washington, the court said. The two men also said they mentioned the juror's newborn daughter, suggested they would follow him home and made it clear they were monitoring his moves. They said the juror gave them daily reports about deliberations and was the lone vote to acquit Washington. The juror was not prosecuted. Dutkel requested a new trial after he learned, in 1995, of Washington's effort to bribe the juror. Dutkel was turned down by U.S. District Judge Edward Rafeedie, who said he was not persuaded that Washington's henchmen affected the verdict against Dutkel. But the appeals court said the outside pressure could have influenced the juror to convict Dutkel. The court also said the juror could have been distracted by his fears for his family and by his efforts to conceal the affair from other jurors and the judge. Defense lawyer Daniel Horowitz said the ruling reaffirms that, in a time of increasingly strict sentences, "we have to have absolute faith in our juries." The case is U.S. vs. Dutkel, 98-55338. - --- MAP posted-by: Don Beck