GUILTY PLEAS IN TULIA DRUG CASES COULD BE HURDLE AT APPEALS COURT

A case being considered for rehearing by the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals could have a bearing on a judge's recommendation to the court that
convictions be overturned and new trials granted for 38 mostly black
defendants in the controversial Tulia drug sting.

In December the state's highest criminal court ruled 5-4 that a new claim
of innocence, backed up with the evidence, outweighed a previous guilty
plea by Wesley Ronald Tuley on an aggravated sexual assault charge in
Dallas County. Tuley, who was freed in February, appealed after he learned
that his accuser had recanted her testimony.

Dallas County prosecutors have requested the appeals court rehear the case.

The court had already determined that a defendant can appeal when new
evidence contradicts a guilty verdict during trial.

In the Tulia cases, 27 of the 38 defendants prosecuted pleaded guilty and
never heard testimony from investigator Tom Coleman, 43, the lone
undercover agent in the operation whose testimony under oath, retired judge
Ron Chapman said earlier this month, is "simply not credible." As agreed
upon by prosecutors and defense attorneys, Chapman is recommending
convictions in all 38 cases be overturned and new trials be granted.

Special Prosecutor Rod Hobson said that if new trials are ordered, the
cases will be dismissed by Swisher County.

Attorneys for the Tulia defendants say the guilty pleas stemmed from
lengthy prison sentences meted out for those first tried after Coleman's
18-month undercover operation. The first Tulia defendant was sentenced to
90 years.

"Our assertion is that the only basis for any of these charges is Tom
Coleman's testimony," said Vanita Gupta, an attorney with the NAACP Legal
Defense and Education Fund, Inc. "The grand jury indictments were based on
Tom Coleman's testimony and thus there's no factual distinction between the
trials and the guilty pleas."

The Court of Criminal appeals asked for the recent evidentiary hearings in
Tulia to determine whether defendants were convicted solely on Coleman's
word and whether the state failed to turn over information from Coleman's
background that may have impeached his testimony.

During testimony, Coleman, who is no longer in law enforcement, was accused
of being a member of the Ku Klux Klan and openly bigoted. Witnesses also
testified that Coleman had possible mental problems, discipline problems, a
bad temper, and in need of constant supervision. He told the court he and
his friends used a racial epithet as a greeting, and he didn't consider it
to be racist.

Additionally, in a 1979 case out of the Court of Criminal Appeals, which
pertains to Coleman's background, the justices ruled that if prosecutors
did not turn over exculpatory or impeachable evidence to the defense it is
a "denial of due process" even in a guilty plea and "as a matter of law
renders the plea involuntary."

Gary Udashen, a Dallas lawyer who specializes in appellate criminal law,
said he believes the court won't change its December ruling. That likely
would bode well for the recommendation Chapman made in the Tulia cases, he
said.

"I think the Court of Criminal Appeals will go along with the
recommendation because it's the right thing to do," Udashen said.