After Faulty Search, US Attorney New Indictment Adds 1 Charge for LI Businessman
John Drago pleaded not guilty to a list of charges handed up in 2018, including failure to collect and pay over taxes and failure to maintain an effective anti-money laundering program in connection with his check-cashing businesses.
October 01, 2019 at 06:30 PM
2 minute read
A federal grand jury in the Eastern District of New York on Tuesday handed up a superseding indictment for Long Island businessman John Drago, adding one more charge in a case over alleged banking and tax-related crimes weeks after a federal judge's decision to suppress prosecution evidence obtained through an unconstitutional search warrant.
Drago pleaded not guilty to a list of charges handed up in 2018, including failure to collect and pay over taxes and failure to maintain an effective anti-money laundering program in connection with his check-cashing businesses in Nassau and Suffolk counties.
On Sept. 10, a magistrate judge in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York found that evidence had been obtained by law enforcement under a search warrant with "plainly unconstitutional" language. She recommended that the evidence be thrown out, and on Sept. 25, U.S. District Judge Sandra Feuerstein filed an order adopting the magistrate's recommendation.
At the time of Feuerstein's ruling, however, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York had already declared it intended to seek a superseding indictment.
The main difference between the original and superseding indictments appeared to be that Tuesday's indictment accused Drago of engaging in unlawful monetary transactions in 2015 and 2016. No charges were dropped, bringing the new total number of charges to nine.
David Siegal of Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, who is one of Drago's lawyers, said the defense team is evaluating the new charging instrument.
"Nevertheless, we continue to believe that the government will face significant hurdles in any case against John, given the court's ruling suppressing the search evidence," Siegal said in a statement.
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This content has been archived.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 AllPatent Trolls Come Under Increasing Fire in Federal Courts
Trade Fixtures in New York Eminent Domain Cases—What Qualifies and How Are They Valued?
10 minute readAttorneys ‘On the Move’: Morrison Cohen Adds White Collar Partner; Corporate/Securities Partner Joins Olshan
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Cars Reach Record Fuel Economy but Largely Fail to Meet Biden's EPA Standard, Agency Says
- 2How Cybercriminals Exploit Law Firms’ Holiday Vulnerabilities
- 3DOJ Asks 5th Circuit to Publish Opinion Upholding Gun Ban for Felon
- 4GEO Group Sued Over 2 Wrongful Deaths
- 5Revenue Up at Homegrown Texas Firms Through Q3, Though Demand Slipped Slightly
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