By LAMECH JOHNSON Tribune Staff Reporter ljohnson@tribunemedia.net A SUPREME Court judge delayed her change-of-plea ruling in the case of disbarred attorney Ralph Jan Ward, who pleaded guilty to stealing nearly $2 million from his clients. The decision by Justice Vera Watkins to postpone her ruling until March 19 came as a result of a ruling in the Court of Appeal on a similar request. On Monday, February 13, the appellate court ordered a retrial in the case of Angelo Rahming, a man who initially pleaded guilty to killing Troy Seymour in November 2006. The incident took place during an armed robbery after the deceased picked up a deposit bag for his employer, KFC. Rahming admitted guilt to the offence in May 2010 before Senior Supreme Court Justice Hartman Longley, only to ask the court if he could withdraw the plea four months later. He claimed he was intoxicated when he entered his guilty plea, but Senior Justice Longley sentenced Rahming to life in prison for murder and 20 years for armed robbery. That decision was appealed and the appellate court ordered a retrial of the matter, after the Crown admitted that the judge was unfair in not allowing the accused man to withdraw the plea. Yesterday, Justice Watkins told the court she wished to review the case and the recent ruling by the higher court before making a decision. Last July, Ward pleaded guilty to stealing $1.9 million from eight of his clients, breaching their trust. Ward was retained by the victims to complete land sales. Justice Watkins initially delayed his sentencing to allow him to return the money he had stolen. However, when he reappeared to report on whether he was able to do so, Ward informed the court of his decision to withdraw his guilty plea and enter a not-guilty plea. Last month, Ward's attorney Murrio Ducille argued that his client had not received proper legal advice before entering his plea. He said his client had no experience in criminal law, despite his legal training. Prosecutor Eucal Bonaby contended that withdrawing the plea would be an abuse of the process.