Breakaway church leader indicted: CEN 5.29.09 May 29, 2009
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Colorado, Property Litigation.trackback
| The leader of Colorado’s largest breakaway congregation, the Rev Donald Armstrong has been indicted on charges of misappropriation of church funds by a Colorado Springs grand jury.
On May 21, Mr Armstrong was briefly held at the El Paso County Criminal Justice Center and released after posting a $20,000 bond. Details of the 20-count indictment were not released by the police, but come in the wake of a bitter split between Grace Church & St Stephens and the Diocese of Colorado. Mr Armstrong told local reporters after his release that he was confident he would be exonerated. “I will, after years of unbridled false accusations, have my day in court, so this is a good step in that direction,” he said. Read it all in The Church of England Newspaper. |
 |
Advertisement
Comments
Sorry comments are closed for this entry
As you know Fr. Armstrong, subsequent to his inhibitition and deposition in The Episcopal Church joined CANA.claiming the charges were trumped up and were made, not for the financial misdoing alleged but because of his conservative religious views. He was subsequently indicted by the civil authorities. Both he and his new congregation, St. George Colorado Spring’s have protested his innocence, and again protested that the actions taken were a result of his religious views. The following is abstracted from his Plea Agreement in Case No. 09-CR-1950 and an abstract of Colorado precedent governing this kind of plea.
“1. The defendant pleads nolo contendere to count Number Fifteen of the Indictment which charges a violation of C.R.S. 18-4-401(1), (4), as amended (a class three felony), in that the defendant committed the offense of Theft-Series ($15,000 or More).
“The factual basis for this plea will be the factual basis contained in the Indictment.
The defendant will further enter an Alford plea pursuant to North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160, 27 L.Ed.2d 162 (1970), as to an added Count Twenty-One, Theft ($500-$1,000), C.R.S. 18-4-401(1)(2)(b.5) (a class one misdemeanor). There is no factual basis to support this charge, however, the defendant is entering a plea to this charge to obtain the benefit of a plea arrangement in which he is receiving a deferred sentence to a felony”
From the Colorado Supreme Court, People v. Darlington, 105 P.3d 230:
“We have held that, for the purpose of a criminal case, a plea of nolo contendere is fully equivalent to a plea of guilty. See People v. Birdsong, 958 P.2d 1124, 1127 (Colo. 1998); Jones v. District Court of County of Routt, 196 Colo. 261, 264, 584 P.2d 81, 84 (Colo. 1978); People v. Carpenter, 709 P.2d 72, 73 (Colo. App. 1985). The sole distinction we have made between a guilty plea and a plea of nolo contendere is that the latter gives the defendant the advantage of not being estopped from denying her fault in a civil action based upon the same facts. Jones, 196 Colo. at 264, 584 P.2d at 83. Where the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and understandingly pleads nolo contendere she may be punished just as if she had entered a plea of guilty. See Alford, 400 U.S. at 36 n.8; People v. Meier, 133 Colo. 338, 340, 296 P.2d 232, 233 (1956); Young, 53 Colo. at 253, 125 P. at 118. Therefore, there is no distinction between a plea of nolo contendere and a plea of guilty for sentencing purposes. People v. Canino, 181 Colo. 207, 210, 508 P.2d 1273, 1274 (1973).” Hat Tip S. Standish
There has been much spin in the blogopshere relative to this case. It would be helpful, since you have well-followed it, if you could present these facts.