This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2015, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Distinguished Utah defense lawyer Ron Yengich is on his way out as the court-appointed attorney for Jeremy Johnson, likely delaying even further the 4-year-old federal case against the St. George businessman on bank fraud and other criminal charges.

Yengich declined to comment Monday after a meeting with the lead prosecutor in the Johnson case and attorney Greg Skordas, who apparently has been tapped to replace Yengich.

Skordas declined to say whether he would be appointed to replace Yengich, but added that a question about such a change was "generally in the right direction" and that while a switch of attorneys was not official it could become so soon.

Skordas, his law partner and wife, Rebecca Hyde Skordas, Yengich and his legal colleague, Chelsea Koch, along with Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Lunnen, met Monday on the 10th floor of Salt Lake City's federal courthouse, where the judges assigned to the case, Chief U.S. District Judge David Nuffer and U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul Warner, have their offices.

The pending change in Johnson's representation — which requires a judge's approval — comes after Johnson and four other defendants rejected plea deals proposed by prosecutors. Details of those offers were not released but generally such accords involve the dropping of some charges, agreement on a recommended sentence and cooperation with prosecutors against other defendants.

After the June 30 deadline for any plea deals passed, defense attorneys and government prosecutors agreed to join in a motion seeking to push back the Sept. 14 trial date — despite Nuffer's earlier admonition that the date was "set in stone."

The motion apparently was a result of Yengich's pending withdrawal and the time needed for a new attorney to get familiar with the case, according to sources familiar with it.

Attorney Ed Wall, who submitted the motion on behalf of one of the other defendants, declined to comment, citing a gag order placed earlier on participants in the case.

The pending change in attorneys comes several weeks after the Federal Election Commission sued Johnson in federal court here, alleging he made unlawful campaign contributions to U.S. Sens. Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Harry Reid, D-Nev., as well as former Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff.

That lawsuit appears to have created a barrier to Yengich's continued representation of Johnson, the sources said, though it was not readily apparent what that roadblock was.

Johnson issued a statement after the FEC lawsuit was filed, saying the allegations stem from his meetings with county prosecutors and state and federal investigators who were investigating Shurtleff and his handpicked successor, former Utah Attorney General John Swallow.

Johnson is a central figure and possible witness against Swallow and Shurtleff, both of whom face multiple criminal counts.

Johnson said he had been promised immunity for his statements, which included his political donations, and was "stunned" when they showed up as evidence in the FEC lawsuit. Johnson, who also is bound by the gag order in his criminal case, declined to comment on the pending attorney change.

The U.S. attorney's office for Utah declined comment for this story as well.

In general, the rejection of proposed plea agreements can be a setback for prosecutors, who routinely use them to get defendants to testify against others.

Warner held five closed-door hearings with each of the defendants to discuss the rejected plea deals, the sources said. Those hearings are not part of the court record in the case. Federal prosecutors requested the hearings, according to Wall, to comply with recent Supreme Court decisions on whether defense attorneys had adequately informed their clients about plea proposals and the possible consequences of turning them down.

In a motion, Wall warned that the hearings could violate the defendants' constitutional rights and the attorney-client privilege of confidential communications.