Convicted Ex-Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver's Appeal Scheduled for March
Attorneys for Silver will have 10 minutes to make their case before the Second Circuit on why a federal jury erred when it found him guilty of accepting millions of dollars in kickbacks last year.
February 19, 2019 at 05:25 PM
5 minute read
Former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, convicted on federal corruption charges for the second time last year, will have an appeal of that decision heard by a federal appellate court next month, recent filings show.
Attorneys for Silver will have 10 minutes to make their case on March 13 before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on why a federal jury erred when it found him guilty of accepting millions of dollars in kickbacks last year.
Silver was sentenced to seven years in federal prison in July over the scheme. Prosecutors had alleged that he used his position as speaker of the Assembly, the highest-ranking position in the chamber, to benefit two law firms in exchange for nearly $4 million in referral fees.
Meir Feder, a partner with Jones Day, will represent Silver before the Second Circuit. Silver was originally represented during his trial at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by Allen & Overy partner Michael Feldberg.
Federal prosecutors will also have 10 minutes to argue why Silver's conviction should stand. Feder argued in a brief with the Second Circuit in November that the appellate court should either acquit Silver on all charges or grant him another trial.
It would be the third time the former lawmaker was tried in the Southern District on the corruption charges. His first conviction, in 2016, was thrown out after the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in McDonnell v. United States narrowed the definition of federal bribery statutes.
Silver was convicted again last year, but Feder argued in his brief that the jury was given the wrong instructions by U.S. District Judge Valerie Caproni. Prosecutors had to establish a quid pro quo arrangement where both Silver and the other parties involved were aware of the scheme and agreed to mutually benefit from it, Feder argued. The jury was, instead, told they could find Silver guilty even if such an agreement wasn't established, he claimed.
“Hamstrung by these instructions (and the knowledge that any reference to an agreement element in summation would draw a sustained objection) Mr. Silver was prevented from arguing to the jury that he did not enter any agreement with Dr. Taub or the developers to exchange benefits for official acts,” Feder wrote.
Feder said the other parties testified at trial that Silver never asked them to agree to a scheme in which he would use them to advance his own financial interests. That missing element should reverse his conviction, Feder argued.
Federal prosecutors disagreed with that interpretation in their own brief with the Second Circuit, arguing that a quid pro quo element could be satisfied by showing that Silver knew he stood to benefit from the scheme, regardless of whether the alleged bribe payers understood his intent.
“The law is likewise clear that the quid pro quo element may be satisfied by proof of the defendant's understanding of the purpose for which the payment is being offered or made,” prosecutors wrote. “In demanding proof of a meeting of minds between the bribe payor and payee, and suggesting that a payee who accepts a bribe believing it to be a bribe has committed no crime unless his payor subjectively intends a bribe, Silver goes too far—well beyond what the relevant statutory text and case law will support.”
Silver was alleged to have used his position in the Legislature to benefit two firms while accepting millions in kickbacks for the work.
Weitz & Luxenberg, a personal injury firm in Manhattan, paid Silver referral fees for asbestos-induced mesothelioma cancer cases. Silver allegedly convinced Dr. Robert Taub, formerly of Columbia University, to refer his cancer patients to the firm in exchange for state research funding. The firm paid Silver for those referrals.
Goldberg & Iryami, a property tax law firm, paid Silver fees for referring two real estate companies to the firm. Silver meanwhile allegedly urged lawmakers to pass laws that would benefit those developers.
Silver's appeal will be heard on March 13 at 10 a.m. by the Second Circuit at the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse in Manhattan.
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 AllEric Adams Trial Set for April as Defense Urges Dismissal of Bribery Count
Decision of the Day: De Blasio Must Sit for Deposition in Suit Over City Program to Transfer Foreclosed Properties
The Legislature Has Enacted Landmark Criminal Justice Reforms. Now It Should Take Steps to Improve the System
8 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 3Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 4Meet the Lawyers on Kamala Harris' Transition Team
- 5Trump Files $10B Suit Against CBS in Amarillo Federal Court
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