John Littrell, one of the former Congressman Jeff Fortenberry’s trial attorneys, could be facing discipline

One of former Representative Jeff Fortenberry’s trial attorneys may face disciplinary action.

Next to Fortenberry and his wife in the background is John Littrell, one of Fortenberry’s trial attorneys.

According to his firm’s website, Littrell specializes in white-collar defense and represents clients from throughout the world. A judge has asked this Los Angeles attorney to explain why he did what he did in March before the Fortenberry jury.

In a courtroom in Los Angeles, John Littrell presented his closing arguments in the trial concerning whether or not Fortenberry lied to the FBI about unlawful campaign contributions.

Remember, Fortenberry waived his constitutional right to testify, and the court instructed the jury not to read anything into the verdict.

Then, defense attorney John Littrell told the jury that, in a sense, Fortenberry had testified because they heard his voice on audio recordings played throughout the six-day trial, and that his client would not have added anything to the proceedings if he had testified because his memory was no longer as good as it once was.

The government then raised an objection.

Now, federal judge Stanley Blumenfeld Jr. is requesting an explanation from Fortenberry’s counsel before the end of the week.

The judge stated that John Littrell “calculatedly crossed the line” by discussing why Fortenberry did not testify during closing arguments, stating that it is a “elementary principle of law” that you cannot do so, especially when it was not evidence and the government had no opportunity to respond.

The court went on to state that while John Littrell believed that his comment was “fair” and that “reasonable minds can disagree,” he is concerned that the attorney may make the same argument in another case, and he asks whether Littrell should be sanctioned or submitted to a discipline committee.

Since Fortenberry has multiple attorneys and one of them has filed an appeal, it is unclear how this will effect the case moving forward.

Fortenberry feels he was set up by the government.

He might have received 15 years in federal jail for the conviction, but instead he was placed on probation by the same court.