A former Allen County auctioneer who pleaded guilty to bid rigging will return to court this week to learn whether a judge will extend his probation.

Mackie Shelton, 70, of Scottsville, was placed on probation for three years in March by U.S. District Court Judge Greg Stivers and ordered to serve 26 weekends in jail and pay a $250,000 fine.

Shelton and Barry Dyer both received the punishment after pleading guilty to the bid rigging charge, which stemmed from their actions at a 2018 real estate auction in Allen County.

According to court records, both men demanded $20,000 payoffs from a pair of potential buyers to stop bidding on 349 acres of farmland and a tract of timber rights for sale by the estate of Lenita Cole, or else Shelton and Dyer would continue bidding up the price.

The buyers paid the money and won the auction, obtaining the land for $492,200 when they were prepared to pay up to $650,400.

In addition to the criminal charges, Shelton and Dyer were sued in Allen Circuit Court by Cole’s estate, and a settlement was reached there.

Since being sentenced, Shelton is alleged to have filed a complaint with the Kentucky Bar Association against attorney Brian Lowder, who represented Cole’s estate in the lawsuit, and two complaints with the Kentucky Board of Auctioneers against James Cook and Barry Claypool, who took part in the 2018 auction and provided information to authorities supporting the bid rigging charge ahead of Shelton’s sentencing.

A hearing has been scheduled for Thursday in U.S. District Court to consider a motion to modify Shelton’s probation.

Jariel Rendell, a trial attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division, claims that the complaints are little more than retaliation on Shelton’s part for being prosecuted, and that his behavior likely violates the terms of Shelton’s probation, which forbids him from contact with the beneficiaries of Cole’s estate and their immediate family.

Rendell said in a filed motion that Shelton’s “retaliatory conduct is troubling” and “shows disrespect for court supervision and the seriousness of his crime.”

Shelton’s attorney, David Broderick, has countered in a court filing that federal prosecutors have not put forth enough evidence to support extending Shelton’s probation and that Shelton’s filed complaints are constitutionally protected speech.

In a reply filed last week, Rendell argued that the complaints themselves “show (Shelton’s) retaliatory intent” and “targeted professional licenses necessary for employment and livelihood.”

“It is hard to believe that defendant Shelton thought his probation conditions intended to allow (rather than thinking he was clever enough to get away with) communications and allegations directed at the victim’s family via a third party,” Rendell said in the filing. “And such a recalcitrant approach to probation – the opposite of genuine rehabilitation – only reinforces the need for the court to step in now, before defendant Shelton harasses anyone else involved in this case.”