How Sam Bankman-Fried's Counsel is Seeking to Squash His Post-Extradition Charges

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SAMUEL BANKMAN-FRIED Court Filing Lewis A. Kaplan, December 9, 2022 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is the table of links with all parts. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here Case Number: S5 22 Cr. 673 (LAK) Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Defendant: SAMUEL BANKMAN-FRIED Filing Date: December 9, 2022 Location: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT I. INTRODUCTION II. BACKGROUND TO ALL MOTIONS A. The Cryptocurrency Industry and Its Rapid Growth B. FTX and Alameda C. 2022: The Crypto Winter D. Impact on FTX E. The Events of November 2022 F. The Original Indictment G. The Extradition Proceedings H. The New Charges Were Improperly Brought STATEMENT OF FACTS I. The Government Requests Mr. Bankman-Fried’s Arrest in the Bahamas II. The Bahamas Extradites Mr. Bankman-Fried Pursuant to Simplified Extradition Proceedings. A. Mr. Bankman-Fried Consents to Simplified Extradition After Considering the Charges in the Diplomatic Note and the Rule of Specialty. B. The Magistrate Commits Mr. Bankman-Fried to Custody for Extradition, Acknowledging That the Rule of Specialty Applies. C. The Minister of Foreign Affairs Issues a Warrant of Surrender On All Counts Except for the Campaign Finance Conspiracy Count (Count 12). III. The Government Charges Mr. Bankman-Fried for Offenses Not Encompassed by the Bahamas’s Warrant of Surrender. ARGUMENT I. The Bahamian Warrant of Surrender Does Not Include the Campaign Finance Conspiracy Charge (Count 12) and Thus It Must Be Dismissed. II. Mr. Bankman-Fried Has Standing to Invoke the Rule of Specialty. A. The Supreme Court Held in United States v. Rauscher that Individual Defendants Have Standing to Assert the Rule of Specialty. B. The Second Circuit Has Interpreted Rauscher to Confer Standing on Defendants Where the Requested State Would Object. C. Holding That an Individual Defendant Does Not Have Standing Under These Circumstances Would Create Untenable Precedent. D. Six Circuits Have Also Held that Individual Defendants Have Standing to Assert the Rule of Specialty. III. The Bank Fraud, Unlicensed Money Transmitting, and FCPA Conspiracy Charges (Counts 9, 10, and 13) Violate the Rule of Specialty and Must Be Dismissed. A. Counts 9, 10 and 13 Are “Separate Offenses” From Those on Which Mr. Bankman-Fried’s Extradition Was Granted. B. The Bahamas Has Not Given Its Express Consent to Counts 9, 10 and 13 as Required Under the Extradition Treaty. IV. Alternatively, the Government Should Be Ordered to Disclose Materials Relevant to Mr. Bankman-Fried’s Extradition Motion for Disclosure and Inspection of Diplomatic Correspondence. CONCLUSION About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case S5 22 Cr. 673 (LAK) retrieved on September 1, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Storage.Courtlistener

How Sam Bankman-Fried's Counsel is Seeking to Squash His Post-Extradition Charges

Too Long; Didn't Read

People Mentioned

@legalpdf

RELATED STORIES