custom ad
NewsApril 12, 2006

A federal judge has postponed for the second time the sentencing of automobile dealer Greg Sparkman on federal arson and mail fraud charges. Judge Henry Autrey moved the sentencing to July 11 at the Cape Girardeau federal courthouse. Sparkman had been scheduled for sentencing Tuesday...

A federal judge has postponed for the second time the sentencing of automobile dealer Greg Sparkman on federal arson and mail fraud charges.

Judge Henry Autrey moved the sentencing to July 11 at the Cape Girardeau federal courthouse. Sparkman had been scheduled for sentencing Tuesday.

Autrey also last week turned down a request from Sparkman's attorney, Rick Sindell of St. Louis, to order a new trial or set aside the verdict against Sparkman.

Sparkman was convicted Oct. 14 on 15 federal felony counts stemming from a December 2000 fire at West Park Motors Inc. Two vehicles were taken from the lot and set ablaze along an isolated stretch of South Sprigg Street. The offices of West Park Motors were destroyed. The federal charges included 13 mail fraud counts based on claims for insurance payments.

Sparkman was originally scheduled for sentencing Jan. 24, a date that was pushed back on request of both the U.S. attorney's office and Sindell. Assistant U.S. attorney Mike Price declined Tuesday to discuss the reasons for the latest delay but added that he expects a sentence will be handed down on July 11.

Receive Daily Headlines FREESign up today!

Sparkman's case has been the subject of a large outpouring of community sympathy. A major part of the case against him was the testimony of a former employee, Scott Smith, who took a story about the arson to federal agents while serving a federal prison term for making methamphetamine.

In his 22-page opinion denying Sindell's request, Autrey dismissed suggestions that he made mistakes about what evidence should be allowed, which witnesses should be called and whether a key federal witness told the truth.

"Defendant points to nothing, other than his own beliefs, to support his contention that no rational juror could conclude his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt," Autrey wrote.

And in summing up his decision to let the conviction stand, Autrey stated that "defendant has woefully failed to satisfy the requirements" of the federal court rules governing whether a new trial or a not guilty verdict should be ordered.

rkeller@semissourian.com

335-6611, extension 126

Story Tags
Advertisement

Connect with the Southeast Missourian Newsroom:

For corrections to this story or other insights for the editor, click here. To submit a letter to the editor, click here. To learn about the Southeast Missourian’s AI Policy, click here.

Advertisement
Receive Daily Headlines FREESign up today!