Disclaimer: Information found on CryptoreNews is those of writers quoted. It does not represent the opinions of CryptoreNews on whether to sell, buy or hold any investments. You are advised to conduct your own research before making any investment decisions. Use provided information at your own risk.
CryptoreNews covers fintech, blockchain and Bitcoin bringing you the latest crypto news and analyses on the future of money.
Sam Bankman-Fried has withdrawn his motion for a new trial., 2026/04/23 10:01:59

Former head of the bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried, who is serving a 25-year sentence for fraud, has withdrawn his motion for a new trial. Nevertheless, he still plans to appeal the verdict in a higher court.
Bankman-Fried submitted a response to the Southern District Court of New York regarding a request from the judge, who asked the former FTX leader to confirm that he had filed the motion for reconsideration independently, without the assistance of lawyers or others. In his letter, Bankman-Fried indicated that due to the need to respond to this court request, he was unable to prepare objections to the prosecution’s arguments.
Furthermore, the former FTX head expressed his lack of faith in a fair hearing of his case by this judge. Consequently, he requested to withdraw the motion for a new trial without forfeiting the right to submit it again. Bankman-Fried intends to file a new motion after his appeal and request for a judge substitution have been addressed.
The judge’s request, to which Bankman-Fried responded, came after the prosecution raised doubts about whether the convicted individual had indeed submitted the motion for a new trial personally. The court suspected that the documents may have been delivered by the former exchange head’s mother, Barbara Fried.
Bankman-Fried filed a motion for a judge substitution back in February. The former cryptocurrency entrepreneur claimed that Judge Lewis Kaplan exhibited “extreme bias.” Bankman-Fried insisted on a new trial, asserting that the proceedings in his case were not impartial, and that the Department of Justice had “intimidated witnesses, forcing them to remain silent or alter their testimonies” during the criminal trial.