This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2016, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Jeremy Johnson has asked the 10th Circuit Court in Denver to reverse a trial judge's decision to jail him pending sentencing in June, claiming the judge relied upon incomplete and incorrect representations by prosecutors.

A motion filed Friday by Johnson's new attorneys, Mary Corporon and Karra Porter, also raised what they claim is a question of first impression for the federal courts: Does a sentencing guideline of zero to six months recommend imprisonment (shifting the burden to the defendant to show he is not a flight risk), or because zero imprisonment is an option, does not recommend imprisonment (leaving the burden on prosecutors to show the defendant is a flight risk).

Following a six-week trial in which a jury found the St. George businessman guilty of eight counts of submitting false information to a bank, U.S. District Judge David Nuffer ruled that a range of zero to six months was a recommendation of incarceration and sent Johnson to jail to await his June 20 sentencing.

But Johnson's attorneys claim the judge's interpretation means Johnson could end up serving more jail time while awaiting sentencing than that suggested by the guideline, an issue they say has never been ruled upon by an appellate court.

Following the jury verdict, Nuffer had initially ordered Johnson released on an ankle monitor. His attorneys say that was consistent with the fact that Johnson, who had never missed a court date, was not a flight risk.

Also, Johnson had already been free for nearly five years, he has lived in Utah all his life and has a wife and two young children, and friends and family had posted a property bond of about $2.8 million. He also had surrendered his passport.

But following an April 1 detention hearing, Nuffer found "clear and convincing evidence" that Johnson was a danger to the community and a potential flight risk prior to his sentencing.

The defense claims the judge relied in large part on the prosecution's memorandum, which asked for immediate incarceration and which many facts were incorrect or the information was "stale" or comprised of "misperceptions," the defense claims.

The defense motion provides a side-by-side chart listing 13 instances where the judge's stated factors regarding flight risk are countered by the defense.

For instance, Nuffer claimed Johnson has access to "large sums of money and knows how to deal with large sums of money." But the defense noted that Johnson — whose assets were largely confiscated in a prior Federal Trade Commission case — qualified for a court-appointed attorney and ended up defending himself at trial.

Nuffer also claimed Johnson had "demonstrated his ability to evade or at least push the limits of court orders." The defense noted there has been no finding that Johnson violated any court order during the five-year duration of the criminal case.

In a separate development, Johnson's attorneys filed a motion asking Nuffer to delay a May 20 evidentiary hearing at which attorneys are set to discuss sentencing guidelines ahead of the actual sentencing date.

Corporon and Porter said in the motion they need more time to review court documents in his case.

The motion also seeks to postpone the hearing until the 10th Circuit Court has dealt with Johnson's motions for a new trial and a judgment of acquittal, which were filed in early April.

Johnson claims in his motion for a new trial that prosecutorial misconduct, faulty jury instructions and other errors made during his trial merit a new proceeding.

Although Johnson was convicted by the jury in March on eight counts of submitting false information to a bank, he was acquitted of 78 other counts, including all fraud counts.

The government alleged that Johnson and the two employees of his online marketing company I Works had conspired to defraud Wells Fargo Bank by submitting false papers to obtain bank accounts that would allow them to charge consumer credit cards after the company's own accounts were shut down because of a high number of chargebacks.

Prosecutors have filed a motion saying Johnson should to spend as much as 33 years in prison.