Appeals court affirms Sparkman's conviction

The U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed Gregory A. Sparkman's conviction Wednesday for charges related to a scheme to defraud his business's insurer by burning an office building and two cars, federal prosecutor Larry Ferrell said.

On Dec. 12, 2000, the office of West Park Motors, the used car dealership co-owned by Sparkman, was destroyed in a fire.

Two unsold cars were driven off the lot and burned near a rock quarry.

Investigators concluded that all three fires were intentionally set.

When questioned, Sparkman claimed to have an alibi. He said he was with Scott Smith, an employee of another business Sparkman owned.

In 2003, after Smith pleaded guilty to manufacturing methamphetamine, he told a special agent for the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives during an interview that Sparkman asked him to drive two cars off the lot the night of the fire.

He also told the agent that he and Sparkman took the cars to the rock quarry and he watched his employer set them on fire.

On Oct. 14, 2005, Sparkman was convicted on 15 counts of mail fraud and arson.

Sparkman argued on appeal that the district court violated his right to due process by failing to persuade testimony from James Furr, or to extend the trial until Furr could appear, according to the nine-page court opinion affirming the decision, written by Circuit Judge Steven M. Colloton.

Furr had been a longtime friend of Smith's and had manufactured methamphetamine with him. During an interview related to those charges, Furr told ATF Special Agent David Dively that Smith admitted to burning down the West Park Motors office himself at Sparkman's request.

Sparkman argued that this statement showed Smith lied on the stand when he suggested that Sparkman had set the fire.

The U.S. Marshall Service said at the time of the trial that they could not bring Furr, who was incarcerated in federal prison, to court in time to testify.

The appellate court agreed with precedent that a defendant does not have an "absolute right to compel the testimony of a witness." The court further ruled that Sparkman did not request Furr's appearance until seven days before trial, and as a result, the Marshals service was not provided ample time to arrange transportation from Colorado, where Furr was incarcerated, to Missouri.

Sparkman also argued against several evidentiary rulings made by the district court, including the decision of District Judge Henry E. Autrey excluding Dively's written reports of the interviews with Furr as hearsay.

The court of appeals ruled that Sparkman failed to demonstrate why Furr's statements should fall within one of the hearsay exceptions.

Sparkman also argued that the district court erred in allowing Smith to testify that a couple of months before Dec. 12, 2000, Sparkman told him he had run an unsold truck into a pond and reported it stolen to collect the insurance, because prior offenses are generally inadmissible in court.

The Court of Appeals ruled, however, that the prior instance of insurance fraud was admissible because it was similar in time and nature to the fraud with which he was charged.

bdicosmo@semissourian.com

335-6611, extension 245