Indicted Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice Loses Bid to Suppress iPhone Evidence
The ruling also allowed prosecutors to use Kings County Supreme Court Justice Sylvia Ash's emails, as well as statements she made to investigators and a grand jury, as evidence in the case.
June 02, 2020 at 06:24 PM
4 minute read
A federal judge on Tuesday denied a bid by Sylvia Ash, the indicted Brooklyn Supreme Court justice, to suppress evidence she produced to the state-chartered credit union whose board she used to chair.
The ruling, from U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan of the Southern District of New York, rejected arguments by Ash and her Morrison & Foerster attorney that federal prosecutors had obtained the data from her Municipal Credit Union-issued iPhone in violation of her Fifth Amendment protections against self-incrimination.
In a 19-page opinion, Kaplan found that Ash had failed to support her claims that the government was behind MCU's request that she return the phone amid an internal probe of wrongdoing by its former chief executive, and said her argument that she was compelled to do so was "insufficient to warrant a hearing, much less to suppress the phone."
The ruling also allowed prosecutors to use Ash's emails, as well as statements she made to investigators and a grand jury, as evidence in the case.
Carrie Cohen, who is representing Ash in the criminal obstruction case, had argued that MCU was already cooperating with the federal government when it made the request in June 2018, and had failed to inform her client that the contents of the phone could be used against her.
At the time, Kam Wong, the former CEO of the 500,000-member financial institution, was under federal indictment for stealing nearly $10 million from MCU. He later pleaded guilty to the charges and was sentenced to five and a half years in prison.
The Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office charged Ash last October with trying to help cover up Wong's scheme, alleging that she had wiped the phone of relevant text messages and then lied to investigators looking into Wong's conduct. Ash, who left the MCU board in August 2016, has pleaded not guilty, and remains free on $500,000 bond.
Prosecutors have stated that they "did not ask or direct" MCU to return the phone, which contained emails, texts and other communications between Ash and Wong.
Kaplan said that although the government's response "arguably falls short of an unambiguous assertion" regarding its alleged involvement, it was "quite reasonable" that the credit union had its own interest in obtaining MCU-issued devices, and Ash had willingly complied.
"Ash's argument fails regardless of whether the government somehow instigated … MCU's request," he said.
Cohen, Ash's attorney, said she was "disappointed in the ruling and continues to believe the government obtained evidence in violation of Judge Ash's rights."
"We now will press forward to trial to set the record straight and restore Judge Ash's good name and reputation," she said.
The Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office did not provide comment on Tuesday.
Ash, 62, has served as a New York state judge since 2006. She was elected to the Kings County Supreme Court in 2011 and became presiding judge of the court's commercial division in January 2016. She has been suspended from her post, pending the resolution of her criminal case.
Prosecutors alleged that during her time on MCU's board, Ash reaped "tens of thousands" of dollars in reimbursements and other benefits under Wong's leadership, including airfare, hotels, entertainment and payment for her phone and cable bills, as well as other expenses.
According to the charging documents, she continued to receive Apple devices and other perks from Wong even after she resigned from the MCU board.
Meanwhile, Joseph Guagliardo, a former New York City Police Department officer and former member of MCU's supervisory committee, pleaded guilty in January to stealing more than $400,000 while serving in a leadership role with the nonprofit bank.
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 AllTrump's SEC Overhaul: What It Means for Big Law Capital Markets, Crypto Work
From ‘Deep Sadness’ to Little Concern, Gaetz’s Nomination Draws Sharp Reaction From Lawyers
7 minute readTrump Picks Personal Criminal Defense Lawyers for Solicitor General, Deputy Attorney General
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1New York Top Court Says Clickwrap Assent Binds Plaintiff's Personal-Injury Claim to Arbitration in Uber Case
- 2'You Can’t Do a First Draft of Common Sense': Microsoft GC Jon Palmer Talks AI, Litigation, and Leadership
- 3About the Awards: Southeastern Legal Awards Q&A with Regional Managing Editor Michael Marciano
- 4Private Credit Boom: Miami’s Role as a Financial and Litigation Hub
- 5Datasite's Ethics and Compliance Team Drives Transformation
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