Former congressional candidate Tan Nguyen was today found guilty of lying to investigators in a case stemming from 14,000 warning letters his campaign sent to Latinos in his failed 2006 challenge of Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Santa Ana.

The jury was hung 9-3 on a second felony count, which alleged that he tried to get a campaign aide to take the blame for the letter. This is the second trial on the federal charges, as a previous jury was hung on both counts in August.

The maximum Nguyen could receive when sentenced Feb. 14 is 20 years in federal prison. His lawyer, Dean Steward, called the odds that they’ll appeal “very, very high.”

Despite the hurdles ahead, Nguyen expressed relief that the trial was over.

“For the last four years, this has been a nightmare,” he told reporters after the verdict.

Nguyen was convicted of obstruction of justice for telling investigators he had nothing to do with the letter when, in fact, he did.

The letters Nguyen’s campaign sent to registered voters with Latino surnames and foreign birthplaces spurred an investigation in possible voter suppression and prompted a response letter to the voters from the secretary of state, reassuring them of their right to vote.

The letters, in Spanish, ambiguously warned that “emigrados” could go to jail for voting, and falsely stated that immigration reform groups would have new database access to information about new voters. The letterhead mimicked the logo of an anti-illegal immigration group, the California Coalition for Immigration Reform.

At the time, Nguyen denied having anything to do with the letters and publicly announced the firing of a 23-year-old campaign worker, Chi Dinh, on the grounds that she sent them out.

At the trial, Steward said Nguyen had seen an initial English version of the letter but had nothing more to do with it. Steward said the letter was the idea of campaign consultant Roger Rudman, and was paid for and coordinated by campaign volunteer Mark Nguyen, a college friend of the GOP candidate.

Federal prosecutors Greg Staples and D.W. Tunnage did not dispute the involvement of Rudman and Mark Nguyen, but presented evidence that Tan Nguyen was also involved all along.

Mark Nguyen testified that Rudman told him facetiously, in Tan Nguyen’s presence, that Tan Nguyen should not know about the letter – and that both the candidate and Rudman laughed.

Staples said his superiors would decide whether to try Tran a third time on the charge of asking the campaign worker, Dinh, to take the blame. But he acknowledged that while a second trial after hung jury is not unusual, a third such trial is typically less likely.