Alleged scheme comes to light [The Brownsville Herald, Texas]

June 17--The federal racketeering trial of attorney Ray R. Marchan has shone a spotlight on some of the inner workings of the legal system in Cameron County -- including evidence pointing to a money-making plan that Marchan and former Judge Abel C. Limas discussed while Limas was still on the bench.

The plan, which involved persuading the Cameron County District Attorney's Office to prosecute a particular case, didn't materialize.

Conversations between Limas and Marchan discussing the plan were recorded by federal investigators and played during the trial of Marchan, who is charged with racketeering and related offenses.

The jury began deliberations Friday and is scheduled to resume on Monday.

Limas already has pleaded guilty to racketeering and is awaiting sentencing.

In the Marchan case, the prosecution says that payments in 2008 totaling more than $11,000 from Marchan to Limas represented kickbacks and bribes.

Defense attorneys Noe Domingo Garza Jr. and Adela Kowalski-Garza counter that the payments were loans, not kickbacks. The defense says Marchan made millions and had no need of money, that it was Limas who was financially strapped and would hit friends for loans.

Assistant U.S. Attorneys Michael J. Wynne and Oscar Ponce are prosecuting the case in federal court before Judge Andrew S. Hanen.

Marchan, 55, of Port Isabel, is charged with seven counts of racketeering, conspiracy to commit racketeering, aiding and abetting extortion, and aiding and abetting wire fraud in connection with Limas' racketeering scheme.

Marchan is accused of giving kickbacks to Limas in return for having appointed him as attorney ad-litem in the civil lawsuit that Juan J. Mancillas and his wife filed against several insurance companies. As some of the parties settled, each would pay Marchan ad-litem fees and he would allegedly kick back a portion of the fees to Limas.

Mancillas lawsuit

In January 2008, when he was state 404th District judge, Limas appointed Marchan as attorney ad-litem in a civil lawsuit that Juan J. Mancillas and his wife, Sylvia Mancillas, in 2005 filed against Leann Hewitt and Reese English, American General Financial Group, Great Southern Life Insurance Company and the National Heritage Foundation Inc.

The lawsuit alleged that NHF changed the beneficiary of three multimillion-dollar life insurance policies from the couple's children to NHF itself without notifying the Mancillas.

According to testimony in Marchan's trial, and information compiled from the law firm that represented the Mancillas, their youngest son suffered a severe brain injury when he was 6 years old that left him unable to speak, walk or care for himself. The life insurance policies were to be used to pay for his care and that of his sibling.

Except for NHF, the other named defendants were either dropped from the lawsuit or settled.

The case against NHF was heard before Limas' court, and on Sept. 9, 2008, a jury awarded the Mancillas family nearly $7 million.

Limas testified during Marchan's trial that Marchan had sat through part of the trial.

The plan

"I wanted the foundation to be prosecuted for the fraud they committed," Limas testified during Marchan's trial of his plan for the National Heritage Foundation.

Limas testified that the idea was to convince Cameron County District Attorney Armando R. Villalobos that NHF should be prosecuted criminally, rather than only facing a civil case.

Limas and Marchan talked about the idea in 2008, Limas testified.

Recordings of conversations about it between the two men were played in court during Marchan's trial.

"Armando is going to be encouraged by that," one of them said during a conversation when they discussed the jury's multimillion-dollar verdict against NHF in the civil case.

Limas' testimony indicated that if the case was accepted by the DA, and NHF was prosecuted, and restitution was ordered, perhaps part of the restitution awarded to the victims (the Mancillas) could be divided between at least Limas and Marchan.

"We're going to talk how to divide it," Marchan said in another conversation.

Testimony also indicated that allegedly at Marchan's urging, Limas directed that a court transcript be made at the expense of a defendant regarding testimony that was presented in the civil case against NHF.

Limas said that Doug Pettit and David Gonzalez, who were assistant district attorneys at the time, had declined the case due to jurisdictional matters.

During another recorded phone call, Limas told Marchan that he had talked to District Judges Leonel Alejandro and Ben Euresti, asking that they give him, Marchan, ad-litem appointments, "and to Pettit to take care of his fears."

In another phone conversation, Marchan and Limas talked about how to get Villalobos to take the case. Marchan told Limas: "Whatever his weakness is: If it's la peda (drinking), we have to get a good bottle for him. Si es vieja (if it's women), we gotta get him a good vieja. I mean, si es hombres (if it's men), pos, I'll leave that up to you."

"I need to grab somebody by the b--," Limas is heard saying in one conversation, expressing frustration that the District Attorney's Office was not taking the case.

Rick Zayas

Attorney Rick Zayas was one of the attorneys in the Juan J. Mancillas case. He represented Leann Hewitt who was ultimately dropped from the lawsuit.

Defense attorneys for Marchan called Zayas to the stand Friday morning. Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael J. Wynne objected, protesting that the defense had not notified the prosecution that it would be calling Zayas.

Zayas said he had been contacted that same morning. Upon questioning by defense attorney Adela Kowalski-Garza, Zayas testified that the parties involved -- rather than the judge -- are the ones who agree on the fee to be paid to the ad-litem attorney.

He stated that Marchan had earned the ad-litem fees in the Mancillas case and had worked hard as an ad-litem attorney, going beyond the call of duty.

"He earned them," Zayas said of the fees paid to Marchan.

On cross-examination by Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael J. Wynne, Zayas said that no, he didn't know if Marchan had kicked back part of the ad-litem fees to Limas. He said he didn't know that Limas had called Marchan back eight times, and had no knowledge of whether they had met or had exchanged money.

Zayas also responded that no, he didn't know whether Marchan and Limas had stood to make money if Villalobos, the district attorney, had taken the case for prosecution.

Zayas said he felt the case should have been prosecuted. "I felt people from Cameron County had been defrauded," he said. Wynne countered that Marchan and Limas had been "far more interested in getting money than doing good things for the people of Cameron County."

Zayas also testified on cross-examination by Wynne that Marchan had attended the court proceedings on the civil case and had been taking notes.

Wynne pressed on, eliciting Zayas' response that Marchan had not made any arguments in the case.

"He sat and took notes, and you don't know what Marchan was writing," Wynne said.

"He could have been doodling for all I know," Zayas answered.

___

(c)2012 The Brownsville Herald (Brownsville, Texas)

Visit The Brownsville Herald (Brownsville, Texas) at www.brownsvilleherald.com

Distributed by MCT Information Services