Maranda Fritz

June 19, 2020 | New York Law Journal

We will likely never see a gut-wrenching video of a prosecutor doing physical harm to a black defendant in court, but prosecutors occupy a critical role in the perpetuation of a system that so disproportionately impacts and imprisons the black community.

By Maranda Fritz

7 minute read

March 29, 2019 | New York Law Journal

Given that all attorneys (except prosecutors) litigate effectively every day with the certainty that if they violate ethical principles or engage in improper conduct they will be subject to monetary and disciplinary penalties, we should continue to question why prosecutors possess enormous power but face little accountability.

By Maranda Fritz and Brian Lanciault

9 minute read

February 22, 2019 | New York Law Journal

New York State Senator Todd Kaminsky has introduced a bill in the new legislative session that would make lying to state prosecutors or investigators a felony. Kaminsky and other supporters of the proposed bill mistakenly believe that state prosecutors face challenges in successfully prosecuting non-violent or non-drug-related crimes. Contrary to Kaminsky's supposition, creating a new crime that is easily charged but not easily defended against does nothing to further criminal justice reform.

By Maranda Fritz and Brian Steinwascher

7 minute read

November 21, 2016 | New York Law Journal

Maranda Fritz, Brian Waller and Brian Steinwascher of Thompson Hine discuss decisions addressing the impact of a corporation becoming entwined in governmental actions, including the Second Circuit's recent decision in 'Gilman', and pending motions predicated on the internal investigation that preceded the indictment in 'United States v. Blumberg'.

By Maranda Fritz, Brian Waller and Brian Steinwascher

19 minute read

November 09, 2016 | New York Law Journal

Maranda Fritz and Brian Waller, of Thompson Hine, continue to examine the government's practice of "overseizure" in light of the FBI's accessing Huma Abedin's emails even though its warrant authorized a search for and seizure of the communications of Anthony Weiner. The FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton's handling of emails may be closed—again—and the next president chosen, but in the process, troubling aspects of the criminal justice system became the subject of intense scrutiny and continuous commentary. Even as the media moves on to post-election coverage, the issues arising from the government's overseizure practices, and the actions of the FBI, remain crucial concerns for the legal community.

By Maranda Fritz and Brian Waller

21 minute read

October 31, 2016 | New York Law Journal

Maranda Fritz, of Thompson Hine, analyzes the the law surrounding government 'overseizure' of data in investigations involving electronic data in light of the government's investigation into emails linked to Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton's aide. She points out that any warrant that would have been sought in the Weiner investigation would have allowed for seizure of electronic files relating to him—not the communications of his wife. The clear danger presented by this Anthony Weiner seizure, and the seizures in many cases, is that the consideration that was extended to the government—to allow the initial overseizure for the purpose of complying with the warrant—is being used by the government to seize and retain any confidential, personal or even intimate communications that happen to reside on the seized computer.

By Maranda Fritz

16 minute read