Court won't let Trump pardon void guilty verdict against Arpaio

But sheriff's lawyers declare victory over ruling that criminal contempt finding has 'no legal consequences.'

A federal appeals court has rejected former Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio's bid to wipe out a judge's guilty finding that preceded President Donald Trump's pardon of Arpaio in 2017.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that Arpaio is not entitled to have the guilty verdict on a misdemeanor contempt-of-court charge vacated because it has no legal significance in the wake of Trump's pardon.

"The final judgment entered in this case was a dismissal with prejudice, and the district court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law played no role in that dismissal," Judge Jay Bybee wrote in a 15-page opinion joined by Judges Randy Smith and Daniel Collins.

In July, 2017, a federal judge found the longtime Maricopa County, Ariz. sheriff and immigration hard-liner guilty of contempt for defying another judge's ruling aimed at halting racial and ethnic profiling by the Arpaio's department.

The following month, before Arpaio was scheduled to be sentenced, Trump pardoned him. The president cited Arpaio's age at the time, 85, and his long record of "selfless public service." Echoing one of Trump's favorite phrases, Arpaio declared himself the victim of a "witch hunt."

The pardon meant Arpaio would never be sent to jail, but when he asked U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton to withdraw the guilty verdict in the case, she declined. The pardon could not rewrite history, she declared.

Arpaio appealed the ruling, arguing that the pardon entitled him to have the guilty verdict formally vacated. The three-judge appeals court panel, all of whom are Republican appointees, turned down that request. But Arpaio's attorneys declared victory anyway because the court opinion emphasized that the guilty finding has no legal consequences.

"The Court gave us exactly what we asked for, which is a finding that the judge’s guilty verdict is legally meaningless," Arpaio lawyer Jack Wilenchik said in a statement. "The judge had found the opposite in her final order; she said that the guilty verdict may, or even should, be considered in future proceedings."

Arpaio's lawyers said the guilty finding could impact some future criminal or civil case, but the appeals court said it would not.

The appeal sparked an internal battle at the 9th Circuit in 2018 after a three-judge panel appointed a special prosecutor to defend the judge's ruling refusing to wipe out the guilty verdict. Justice Department prosecutors had agreed with Arpaio and urged the judge to vacate that finding.

The court's move to appoint a special prosecutor irked some conservative judges, who said it could fuel more demands for court-appointed special counsels. A total of five 9th Circuit judges resisted the move, but a majority of the court declined to disturb the appointment of former prosecutor Christopher Caldwell to argue in the case.

Arpaio took that special-prosecutor issue all the way to the Supreme Court, but the justices declined to take it up.

Bybee and Smith were appointed by President George W. Bush. Collins is a Trump appointee.