As Silver's Retrial Begins, Impact of SCOTUS 'McDonnell' Makes Early Debut
Silver's counsel, Allen & Overy partner Michael Feldberg, previewed the defense strategy of attacking the definitive link between an official act and a thing of value to prove a bribery charge after McDonnell v. United States.
April 30, 2018 at 02:35 PM
5 minute read
For most of the participants on-hand for the start of former state Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver's corruption trial redux, the occasion was notable as much for its replay of Silver's first trial as what had changed.
The attorneys were different on both sides, while the judge, U.S. District Judge Valerie Caproni of the Southern District of New York, still presides from the bench. The charges haven't changed since Silver was indicted in 2015 on honest services, extortion and illegal monetary transactions, for which he was found guilty on all seven counts in November that year. Silver, too didn't appear to have changed much, the 74-year-old looking little worse the wear in his blue windowpane suit. He even appeared to be wearing his old state assembly lapel pin.
What has changed is the law—and the impact of the change was made apparent most clearly in the approach of Silver's attorney, Allen & Overy partner Michael Feldberg, during opening arguments.
The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in McDonnell v. United States narrowed the application of federal bribery statutes to those where a clear quid pro quo of something of value results in an official act taken by the elected official. The lack of clear language in Silver's jury instructions to this effect during the last trial led the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to begrudgingly vacate the former assembly speaker's conviction in July 2017.
Feldberg, laying out the defense's strategy in the coming weeks-long trial, did all he could to focus the jury on the needed elements to prove a crime in the wake of McDonnell, asking the jurors to consider what the terms of the alleged deal between Silver and the other sides of the conspiracies were, when and how the alleged quid pro quo was put in place, and what the official acts specifically were that Silver was to take in exchange for the benefit.
Sure, Feldberg acknowledged, some of what Silver did may be displeasing to the jury, maybe even unseemly, and possibly not as honest as would be ideal. But, he argued, the actions were not only legal but within Silver's right as a former member of Albany's so-called “three men in a room” power brokers.
“It is not a crime to be a politician—even a powerful one,” Feldberg said.
At the core of the government's case are two schemes, both of which hinge on referral fees paid to Silver by two different law firms—Weitz & Luxenberg, for asbestos-induced mesothelioma cancer cases, and Goldberg & Iryami, for tax certiorari work. In the former, Silver allegedly induced former Columbia University Dr. Robert Taub in to referring his cancer patients, in exchange for state funding for research and other perks, while receiving rainmaker fees from the law firm.
In the latter, Silver allegedly orchestrated a complex scheme that saw major real estate companies dependent on sun-setting state real estate laws send their tax work to Goldberg & Iryami where, unbeknownst to them, Silver received referral fees for the business.
The government's attempt to construction criminal acts out of the details of these were doomed to fail, Feldberg said.
“Everything that happened in this case was not only legal, but was designed and did help people,” he told the jury. Behind him, as he spoke, slides flashed on the large screen opposite the jury: “NO CRIME = NOT GUILTY”
Departing from the previous trial where Silver's attorneys sought to strike a respectful tone by referring to the defendant always as “Mr. Silver,” Feldberg referred to the former assembly speaker informally, by his nickname “Shelly,” and asked the jury to exercise the same fairness and open-mindedness they would expect for themselves or someone they loved. He implored them to “take the burden of these unfair charges from the shoulders of a man who did not commit any crime.”
During its opening statement, the government appeared committed to the game plan with which it previously won. Former assistant U.S. attorney Carrie Cohen, now a partner at Morrison & Foerster (and who was on hand for a portion of the morning proceedings) spoke of power, greed and corruption. Assistant U.S. Attorney A. Damian Williams echoed those themes in his own opening, turning Cohen's gold mines into a golden goose, and reiterating accusations of lie after lie told by Silver meant to keep not only the public but even those close to him from learning of the schemes that netted him approximately $5 million.
“This was not politics as usual,” Williams said, echoing another line from the government's previous opening. “This was politics as profits, and no one was better at this than Sheldon Silver.”
Many of the government's previous witnesses are expected to return to the stand, including Taub, who was set to begin testimony Monday. What they will show, along with the documents and recordings to be deployed by the government, would show the “overwhelming evidence” evidence of Silver's “lies … lies designed to keep everyone in the dark.”
The most important difference between the fall 2015 trial and the one begun Monday are the 15 persons sitting in the jury box. The ten women and five men—the 12 jurors and three alternates—ultimately hold Silver's fate in their hands. Another additional change in personnel was reflected as U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman attended Williams' opening statement, mirroring the appearance of his predecessor, Preet Bharara, at Silver's 2015 trial.
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 AllBen & Jerry’s Accuses Corporate Parent of ‘Silencing’ Support for Palestinian Rights
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
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