lesappeal

Follows are excerpts from the 50 page appeal brief filed on behalf of lester
coleman before the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, New York.

The case will likely be decided in the Spring.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
-------------------------------------------------------------X

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

                        APPELLEE.

                - Against -

LESTER COLEMAN

                        DEFENDANT - APPELLANT

--------------------------------------------------------------X

                                                        ROBERT J. BOYLE
                                                        350 Broadway
                                                        Suite 308
                                                        New York, NY 10013
                                                        (212) 431-0229
                                                        Attorney for Defendant - Appellant

    Appellant was sentenced on May 15, 1998. The court adopted the plea
agreement to the extent of sentencing appeallant to time served ( S.13; 58a ).
However, the court sentenced appellant to three, and not two years supervised
release. In so doing, the court imposed a condition that Mr. Coleman not speak
about his case on the radio. Explaining its reasons for this condition, the
court, in an obvious reference to the Special Prosecutor's pending investigation
of President Clinton, stated as follows:

        "Well, I have thought a lot about this case and the case has gendered (sic) a
lot of interest in a related field in the newspapers. A number of commentators
in the media have received the false impression, from where I don't know, except
there are some professors in law schools who have aided and abetted this thing,
that the filing of a fa;se affadavit in a civil case, it was not a prosecutable
offense that this case -- and not only non-prosecutable but was never
prosecuted.

        This is a living example of all those reports and statements. It is too bad
that inside the beltway in Washington this message has not been conveyed because
all those articles have given rise to a measure on the part of alot ( sic )
judges, surpriingly enough, who think that the U.S. Attorney's Office is
virtually without any power to prosecute this kind of a case. That's false
thinking.

        And in your radio broadcast, if I were to find out that you aided and abetted
any such false thinking in the promotion of your innocence or wrongful
prosecution, I would revoke your supervised release instead and slap you back in
jail for as long as I can put you there. Because what you did was a crime. And
I don't want you or anybody else to walk out of here and say, I made a plea
agreement because they had to make a plea agreement because it was not
prosecutable.

        I want to warn you on that. It's too bad that that kind of thing gets bandied
about abroad."

(S. 11 - 12; 56a - 57a ) .

        Following the foregoing remarks, the court sentenced appellant to time-served
plus three years supervised release. Although acknowledging that appellant was
financially unable to pay, the court imposed a find of $30,000 payable in
installments of 25% of appellant's yearly salary. ( S. 13; 58a ) The court
restricted appellant's travel to within the district of supervision and required
he surrender his passport. The condition prohibiting appellant from speaking
about his case is included in the conditions of supervised release provided to
him after sentencing.

        In the instant case, Mr. Coleman is prohibited from uttering anything about his
case on the radio, be it description of his offense, his opinion as to why he
believes he was prosecuted, his reasons for entering a plea. This condition is
overbroad and unconstitutional.   Accordingly, this court should vacate the
sentence and remand the case for trial.

        Given the district court's stated reasons for imposing the condition - its
disagreement with media commentators in the investigation of the President - the
appearance of justice would be better served if Mr. Coleman appeared before a
different judge. United States v. Doe, 79 F.3d at 1324. Accordingly, it is
respectfully requested that upon this court order that the case be assigned to a
different judge.

        In February, 1997, Mr. Coleman was diagnosed with post traumatic stress
disorder. According to his physician, he is suffering from major depression,
insomnia and nightmares about what the the physician states was caused by severe
medical maltreatment related to a surgical procedure while in pre-trial
detention. Mr. Coleman was being treated and under medication when he entered
into the plea agreement in September, 1997.

        A presentence report prepared by the Department of Probation verified Lester
Coleman's condition. This report was provided to the court as required. They
also reported the the appellant's sole asset was a checking account which had a
balance of $1031. They also reported a debt in the amount of $1375 (PSR p61)
At the time of the report, Mr. Coleman's income exceeded his expenses by a mere
$43 ( PSR p62) Yet the district court imposed a fine of $30,000 - the maximum
permissible for the offense - payable in installments of 25% of his monthly
income. Under the court's plan, Mr. Coleman would be forced to pay $565.50 per
month to the government. Based upon his monthly expenses, he would be incurring
a monthly debt of $523.50 .

        Accordingly, this court should :

a. Vacate the sentence
b. Remand the case before a differenct judge
c. Grant such other further relief as this court deems just and proper