HATCH

BOSTON — Richard Hatch’s unrelenting bid to prove his innocence of tax evasion on his $1-million Survivor winnings will soon land in the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Hatch’s assertion that his trial was unfair and his sentence too harsh led the appeals judges last week to grant the reality TV star a hearing to argue his case.

After reviewing written briefs from Hatch’s lawyer and federal prosecutors, the judges agreed to hear oral arguments. The 40-minute hearing — 20 minutes for each side — will be held March 8.

“I am deeply grateful that they have decided to hear us,” said Michael Minns, Hatch’s Texas lawyer. “I expected them to do it because these are serious, important constitutional issues.”

A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s office said such hearings are routine.

“There’s nothing unusual about this at all,” said spokesman Thomas Connell. “Oral arguments are a standard part of the appellate process.”

Hatch, 45, of Newport, is serving a 51-month sentence at FCI Morgantown, W.Va., which is comparable to a minimum-security prison camp. A jury convicted him of tax evasion last January in U.S. District Court, Providence. At the trial, prosecutors presented evidence that Hatch intentionally avoided paying taxes on income from Survivor, a stint as a radio-show host, celebrity appearances and rental property.

Judge Ernest C. Torres called Hatch’s many explanations for not paying the taxes “preposterous” and, after concluding that he had been untruthful on the stand, hit him with the toughest sentence allowable.

Hatch, who maintained his innocence in public, walked away from a plea deal with prosecutors confident that he would be found not guilty by a federal jury. He testified at the trial in his own defense, blaming his tax problems on his inept bookkeeping and the poor advice of accountants. He said he always intended to pay the taxes he rightfully owed.

In the appeal, Minns asserted that Torres prevented him from adequately exploring a key part of his client’s defense — that Hatch thought CBS would pay the taxes on his winnings. Hatch maintains that the show’s producers allowed food to be smuggled to a rival contestant and that when he confronted producer Mark Burnett about it, he was led to believe that if he won the show’s jackpot he would be off the hook for the taxes.

Prosecutors, in a written response to the appeal, argued that Torres would not allow Minns to delve into Survivor’s game rules, but did give him the opportunity to ask about the tax implications of any alleged cheating.

Minns, in a reply brief filed yesterday, argued that was inadequate.

“Standing alone, it must have appeared unreasonable, even ridiculous, and certainly untrue, that Hatch believed someone else paid his taxes,” Minns wrote. “How absurd, that Hatch would think he didn’t owe taxes on his $1 million! But, given the opportunity to explain why, in the first place, Hatch had the idea that his taxes would be paid — a behind-the-scenes deception on the Survivor show tantamount to an attempt to rig the contest, and a subsequent agreement proposed by Burnett — and Hatch’s belief would have appeared more reasonable and truthful to the jury.”

In the appeal, Minns also said that the testimony the judge relied upon in determining that Hatch obstructed justice related to fraud counts for which Hatch was actually acquitted. That determination led the judge to lengthen Hatch’s sentence.

“The jury never made the findings the court relied on to enhance Hatch’s sentence,” Minns wrote.

Minns also said that the defense was inappropriately limited in cross-examining government witnesses.

rsalit@projo.com