Order granting compassionate release: waiving exhaustion and granting compassionate release due to age, diabetes, hypertension, obesity; “When the Court sentenced Zukerman, the Court did not intend for that sentence to ‘include a great and unforeseen risk of severe illness or death’ brought on by a global pandemic.”

Order granting compassionate release to defendant with hypertension, sleep apnea, high blood pressure, and  high cholesterol, who had served half his sentence despite the fact BOP had granted home detention because the required prison quarantine before release was a “dangerous set of conditions and Kafkaesque approach.”

Second Circuit Decision to Vacate and Remand Based on Sentence Higher than Guidelines for Illegal Reentry into the United States

Memorandum of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amici Curiae In Support of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Indictment.

Argument: Public advocacy by the United States Attorney conflicts with the proper role of a federal prosecutor. Dismissal of the indictment, polling the grand jury, or conducting an evidentiary hearing are appropriate and lawful sanctions for inappropriate prosecutorial grandstanding. The word ‘alleged’ does not talismanically erase prejudice.

Joint amicus curiae brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, the New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and the New York Council of Defense Lawyers.

Argument: Defendants should be sentenced based only upon those losses that their conduct proximately caused. The government’s efforts to limit proximate cause analysis to securities fraud cases are unconvincing and unsupported; application of proximate cause principles will avoid unjust results that conflict with the purposes of the guidelines.

Brief of Amici Curiae [New York County Lawyers’ Association, New York State Defenders Association, New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, National Association for Public Defense, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers] in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion Seeking Enforcement of this Court’s Orders, Modified Injunctive Relief, and a Finding of Civil Contempt.

Argument: The Sixth Amendment guarantees open and uninhibited attorney-client communications. The pre-arraignment consultation between attorney and client is a critical meeting with broad consequences. The presence of cameras in attorney-client consultation booths prevents free and open communication in violation of the Sixth Amendment and the settlement order. There is no justification for the presence of cameras in attorney-client consultation booths.