A legal expert at the US Congressional library, Norma C. Gutiérrez, has studied the legalities around the deposing of president Zelaya in Honduras on June 28, and found that it was done legally (although exiling him was not). It was thus not a coup. Here is the report.
The crucial conclusion is formulated thus: “Available sources indicate that the judicial and legislative branches applied constitutional and statutory law in the case against President Zelaya in a manner that was judged by the Honduran authorities from both branches of the government to be in accordance with the Honduran legal system.” Thus, it was not a coup d’état, in plain English.
A detail: The decree PCM-19-2009 that is mentioned on page 3 is dated June 25, not May 26. See original.
The anti-Honduran slant of New York Times is obvious in their coverage of this report. The article ends: “Her bottom line: the case against Mr. Zelaya was rooted in constitutional and statutory law. His removal from the country was not.” They are leaving their readers with the wrong impression. The distinction is that the removal of president Zelaya from office was legal, but the removal of citizen Zelaya from Honduras was not.
Related in DN.