Prosecutors will decide whether to re-try former Casper businessman Tony Cercy on a count of third-degree sexual assault, according to the results of a hearing in Natrona County District Court on Friday

Assistant District Attorney Mike Blonigen said during the status conference that he would notify the court by 5 p.m., Monday, Feb. 3, whether a new charge will be filed

Cercy's attorneys Pamela Mackey and Jeffrey Pagliuca said they agreed with that deadline.

District Court Judge Daniel Forgey asked if there were any other matters to discuss, and the status conference was over in a matter of minutes.

The hearing came three weeks after the Wyoming Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Forgey improperly instructed the jury about oral sex during the second trial in November 2018 of Cercy on third-degree sexual assault of a woman in June 2017,

The supreme court ordered the case be reconsidered.

Cercy's family has moved to Texas and he is free on bond.

The possible retrial marks the latest twist in a saga when a young woman accused Cercy -- the former owner of Power Service in Mills -- of sexually assaulting her at his former home at Alcova Lake.

He was charged with first-, second- and third-degree sexual sexual assault.

In February 2018, a jury acquitted him of the first- and second-degree counts, but deadlocked on the third-degree count. Forgey declared a mistrial.

The victim asked Blonigen to refile the third-degree charge.

Forgey granted the defense's request to move the trial from Natrona County on the grounds that Cercy could not get a fair trial here.

The judge moved the trial to Hot Springs County Court in Thermopolis.

In November, a jury in Hot Springs County Court convicted him of the third-degree count.

In February, Forgey sentenced him to a six- to eight-year prison term.

In March, the Wyoming Supreme Court denied Cercy's request to be released on bond pending the results of his appeal.

In May, Cercy appealed his case to the Wyoming Supreme Court in May and raised these issues, according to the court's opinion:

  • "1. Did the decision to retry Mr. Cercy for third-degree sexual assault violate the prohibition against double jeopardy?
  • "2. Was the jury properly instructed on the law under which it could find Mr. Cercy guilty of third-degree sexual assault?
  • "3. Does evidentiary or double jeopardy law govern evidence of cunnilingus on retrial?"

The supreme court did not agree with Cercy's appeal that he was tried twice for the same crime, known as double jeopardy, according to the unanimous decision of the five justices.

Instead it focused on how Forgey instructed the jury in Hot Springs County Court before it began deliberations.

Enter your number to get our free mobile app