NEW ORLEANS - A federal appeals court Monday upheld extortion and fraud convictions against Cecil Brown, a Eunice cattleman accused of shaking down Texas businessmen by taking advantage of his long friendship with former Gov. Edwin W. Edwards.

Prosecutors alleged that Brown extorted payments from businessmen wanting to build a juvenile prison in Jena and get waste disposal contracts in New Orleans.

Edwards was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the case, which was tried last year and grew out of the same wiretap and secretly recorded evidence that resulted in the former governor's May 2000 conviction involving state gambling licenses. Brown was convicted in that case, too, and appeals in that matter are pending.

The appellate cases, while different, are linked because the arguments Brown's attorneys made attacking the wiretap authorization that led to his conviction are similar to those made by Edwards' attorneys in the gambling corruption case.

But Edwards said Monday he isn't overly concerned by the ruling because his attorneys made several other arguments more important to his appeal than the wiretap issue.

"We have more critical issues," Edwards said. "This decision will not negatively impact us, but it would've been helpful if they had reversed on the wiretap authorization issue."

The other key arguments for Edwards - not made in the Brown case - were the removal of Juror 68 after nine days of deliberation and the use of an anonymous jury. Monday's 5th Circuit ruling only touched on the wiretap issue.

Edwards and Brown were allowed to remain free after the gambling case convictions. Brown, however, was ordered to prison after last year's conviction in the case involving the Texas businessmen.

The 5th Circuit, in its decision released Monday afternoon, rejected Brown's arguments that he deserved a new trial because court permission for electronic surveillance was based on word of an untrustworthy witness: Texas con man Patrick Graham.

Brown's appeal said the government misled U.S. District Judge Donald Walter of Shreveport into permitting wiretaps based on untrustworthy information from Graham.

The three-judge 5th Circuit panel that heard the case unanimously rejected Brown's arguments. Even though a different three-judge panel is considering the Edwards appeal and could come to a different conclusion, it is unlikely, judicial watchers say, that the two panels would provide conflicting rulings.

"In sum, the affidavit provided to Judge Walter contains enough information with respect to Graham's reliability for the judge to make a proper ruling on the question of probable cause," Judge Edith Jones wrote for the panel in Monday's ruling.

"Moreover, even if we assume ... that Patrick Graham could not be trusted, and we set to one side all the allegations that are not independently corroborated, the affidavit still contains enough evidence to establish probable cause to believe that a crime was being committed," Jones added.

Panel members also rejected arguments that Graham's recorded conversations with Brown were misinterpreted. And they rejected Brown's claims that federal attorneys vindictively prosecuted Brown by adding additional charges after his initial indictment.

The case also involved former Houston Mayor Fred Hofheinz, who accepted a plea agreement and testified against Brown.

Graham, who worked for Hofheinz, testified during Brown's case that in September of 1993 he delivered $245,000 from Hofheinz to Edwards at the Louisiana governor's mansion. Graham told federal authorities that Brown told him Edwards' received bribes "all the time."

Brown's extortion and conspiracy case centered on deals in which Hofheinz needed the Louisiana state government's approval to build a $35 million juvenile prison in the state and an attempt to bring the Minnesota Timberwolves basketball team to New Orleans. Hofheinz testified he paid about $645,000 in bribes to Brown to curry Edwards' favor.

- Gannett Capital Bureau Chief John Hill contributed to this report.