A jury found State Representative Larry Inman not guilty of lying to the FBI Tuesday after nearly 12 hours of deliberation in federal court in Grand Rapids.

While Inman was found innocent of that charge, the jury was hung on two other charges, including attempted extortion and soliciting a bribe, leading to a mistrial on those counts. Jury members reported being evenly split during deliberations and were hung up on the line between criminal activity and legally seeking campaign funds. A guilty verdict requires jurors to believe a defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Inman, who represents the 104th District of Grand Traverse County, is accused of seeking payment from members of the Michigan Regional Council of Carpenters and Millwrights (MRCCM) in 2018 by text in exchange for a 'no' vote on repealing the state's prevailing wage law. In several texts, detailed in the indictment, Inman asked for MRCCM members to increase their contributions to him in exchange for blocking the repeal, adding at the end of the texts, "We never had this discussion."

MRCCM did not make additional contributions to Inman, and he ended up voting 'yes' in a 56-53 vote that successfully repealed the law. The charges allege that when an FBI agent confronted Inman about the texts and asked if he had communicated with MRCCM to solicit contributions in exchange for his vote, Inman denied having any such communications. Following his indictment, Inman refused to resign and later disclosed an opioid addiction he said had affected his performance in office.

Inman's criminal trial took place over the past week in Grand Rapids. Federal prosecutors are already seeking a date for a second trial on the extortion and bribery charges - which carry penalties of up to 20 and 10 years in prison, respectively - but it is not yet clear whether one will be granted. While still facing potential legal troubles, Inman left the courtroom Tuesday night as a free man following the verdict reading. Meanwhile, organizers of an effort to recall Inman are waging their own legal battle, challenging a decision from the Bureau of Elections to invalidate nearly 14,000 petition signatures because of a single word that was accidentally omitted from the petition language.