STATE OF IDAHO

OFFIC E OF THE ATTO RNEY GENERAL

LAWR ENC E G. WASDEN

January 16, 2020

TRANSMITTED VIA HAND DELIVERY AND EMAIL

The Honorable Scott Bedke

Speaker of the House
Idaho House of Representatives
Idaho State Capitol
700 W . Jefferson Street, Room E303
Boise, Idaho 83702
sbedke(~l)house. idaho.gov

Re: Request for AG analysis

Dear Speaker Bedke:

On January 15, 2020, Representative John Green was convicted of a felony by a jury of Conspiracy
to Defraud the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371) in the case of United States of America v. Thomas
Selgas & John Green. (Crim. Action No. 3:18-CR-356-S (Verdict of the Jury attached hereto).
Article VI, § 3 of the Idaho Constitution indicates:

Section 3. DISQUALIFICATION OF CERTAIN PERSONS. No person is

permitted to vote, serve as a juror, or hold any civil office who has, at any place,
been convicted of a felony, and who has not been restored to the rights of
citizenship, or who, at the time of such election, is confined in prison on conviction
of a criminal offense. 1

The Idaho Supreme Court has determined a conviction occurs at the point where the jury delivers
its verdict and the judge accepts it. 2 United States v. Sharp, 145 Idaho 403, 403 (2008).

1
Portions of this constitutional provision have been codified at Idaho Code § 59-90l(l)(h): Every civil elective
office shall be vacant upon the happening of. . . Conviction of an incumbent officeholder of any felony, or of
any public offens e involving the violation of his oath of office.
2
Under Federal Criminal Rule of Procedure 32(k), a judgment of conviction must be entered that sets forth the jury
verdict, adjudication, and sentence. Since Representative Green has not been sentenced yet, that judgment is not yet
signed by the judge and entered by the clerk.

P.O. Box 83720, Boise, Idaho 83720-001 O

Telephone: (208) 334-2400, FAX: (208) 854-8071
Located at 700 W. Jefferson Street, Suite 21O
Speaker Scott Bedke
January 16, 2020
Page 2

Recognizing that a jury verdict is not a judgment of conviction, it is still no less final. United
States v. Klein, 560 F.2d 1236, 1241 (5 th Cir. 1977). For example, federal courts have recognized
that a verdict of conviction may be used for evidentiary purposes prior to the entry of a judgment
of conviction. Id. at 1241; United States v. Smith, 623 F. 2d 627, 630 (9 th Cir. 1980). Although
Representative Green may be released from custody while his sentencing is pending, he remains
convicted. Similarly, although Representative Green may appeal his conviction and be released
from custody pending his appeal, he remains convicted. His conviction is only removed if an
appeals court overturns it. Based upon Representative Green's conviction of a felony, he appears
to have lost his qualifications for office.

Article III, § 9 of the Idaho Constitution provides:

POWERS OF EACH HOUSE. Each house when assembled shall choose its own
officers; judge of the election, qualifications and returns of its own members,
determine its own rnles of proceeding, and sit upon its own adjournments; but
neither house shall, without the concmrence of the other, adjourn for more than
three days, nor to any other place than that in which it may be sitting.

Under this provision, the House is the judge of the qualifications of its own members.

You have also inquired as to how a member is removed from the House. A1iicle III, § 11 states:

EXPULSION OF MEMBERS. Each house may, for good cause shown, with the
concurrence of two-thirds of all the members, expel a member.

Under A1iicle III, §11, the House is sole determinant as to whether "for good cause" has been
shown. An expulsion requires a 2/3 vote of the members. A1iicle III, § 9 indicates that it is within
the House's discretion as to how an expulsion within the House will occur.

Please contact me if you to discuss any of these provisions in greater detail.

BRIAN KANE
Assistant Chief Deputy

BK:kw

cc: Representative Megan Blanksma

Representative Jason Monks
 Case 3:18-cr-00356-S Document 184 Filed 01/15/20 Page 1 of 1 PagelD 968

United States District Court

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§
v. § CRIM. ACTION NO. 3:18-CR-356-S
§
THOMAS SELGAS §
JOHN GREEN §

VERDICT OF THE JURY

Count One: Conspiracy to Defraud the United States

We, the jury in the above-entitled case, find Defendant Thomas Selgas:

of the Conspiracy to Defraud the United States, the

"Guilty" or "Not Guilty" offense charged in Count One of the Indictment.

We, the members of the jury, find Defendant John Green:

of the Conspiracy to Defraud the United States, the

"Guilty" or ''Not Guilty" offense charged in Count One of the Indictment.

Count Two: Evasion of Payment/or Tax.Years 1998 through 2002 and 2005

We, the members of the jury, find the Defendant Thomas Selgas:

of Evasion of Payment for Tax Years 1998 through 2002

"Guilty" or "Not Guilty" and 2005, the offense charged in Count Two of the
Indictment.

SIGNED January 15 ·, 2020.

PRESIDING JUROR