Manafort Team Might Not Challenge Allegations He Lied to Feds
Manafort's attorney said it made sense to continue their talks with the special counsel, suggesting they might be able to resolve some disagreements and head off a future court hearing.
December 11, 2018 at 05:23 PM
3 minute read
An attorney for Paul Manafort signaled to a Washington, D.C., federal judge Tuesday that the former Trump campaign chairman's legal team might not challenge the special counsel's allegations that he violated his plea deal.
Richard Westling, who is representing Manafort, informed U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson that Manafort's attorneys spoke with prosecutors for Robert Mueller III Tuesday, and they plan to follow up with their client. Westling said it made “sense” to continue their talks with the special counsel about those allegations, suggesting they might be able to resolve some disagreements and head off a later court hearing before Jackson.
“I do think there's some sense today that the certainty of a hearing is less clear,” Westling said.
Jackson agreed to a timetable for Manafort's team to notify the court whether it plans to challenge prosecution's allegations against Manafort. His defense team is expected to file with the court by Jan. 7, with all briefing on the issue wrapped up by Jan. 18. Jackson set a tentative hearing date for Jan. 25., although that could be dropped.
|
➤➤ Keep up with Trump's legal team and the latest maneuvers in the Mueller investigation. Sign up here for Trump Watch by Ellis Kim.
The judge convened Tuesday's hearing after Mueller's prosecutors on Friday outlined their allegations that Manafort breached his September plea deal. In that filing, prosecutors accused Manafort of lying to federal authorities about his contact with the Trump administration, including outreach that Manafort allegedly authorized someone to make on his behalf to an administration official as recently as May.
The special counsel's office also accused Manafort of lying about his contact with Russian national Konstantin Kilimnik, a longtime associate whom prosecutors believe conspired with Manafort in an effort to tamper with witnesses this year. Mueller's office also accused Manafort of initially misleading Justice Department prosecutors working on a probe in another district, as well as about a significant payment he made in 2017.
If Jackson agrees with prosecutors' view that Manafort violated his deal, it could lead to a heavier sentence for the lobbyist, who, at 69, already faces the likelihood of a substantial prison sentence. On top of his September guilty plea in D.C., Manafort was convicted on eight counts of financial fraud by an Alexandria, Virginia, federal jury in August.
He's expected to be sentenced in Virginia in February. Jackson previously set a tentative March sentencing date for Manafort in D.C.
Prosecutors have also not yet said whether they intend to bring more charges against Manafort. In a hearing in D.C. this month, top prosecutor Andrew Weissmann declined to rule out the possibility the government could bring additional charges for his alleged lies. “That determination has not been made yet,” he simply told Jackson.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSupreme Court Rebuffs GOP Request to Reject 'Thousands' of Pennsylvania Provisional Ballots
'Unfair Competition'?: Akerman Files Trademark Infringement Lawsuit Against Maryland Nonprofit
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 2Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 3Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 4Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 5The Law Firm Disrupted: Big Law Profits Vs. Political Values
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250