| Avenatti
Appealing Nike Guilty Verdict Argues
California Law Allows It Contesting
Restitution
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Patreon
Song
Radio
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
Jan 19 – When after three days
of jury selection the trial of
Michael Avenatti for allegedly
extorting Nike began,
Assistant US Attorney Robert
Sobelman told the selected
jurors that Avenatti was
supposed to look out for the
interests of his client, but
he did not - he had a weapon,
social media. More on
that first day on Patreon here.
Into the docket
on July 6, 2021, Judge
Gardephe's 96 page order
denying all of Avenatti's
post-trial motions,
concluding: "if Avenatti
believed – prior to trial –
that press access to voir dire
presented a risk to his right
to receive a fair trial, it
was necessary for him to make
an application to
restrict press access to voir
dire, so that this Court could
perform the balancing
analysis discussed in
Stewart, 360 F.3d 90, United
States v. King, 140 F.3d 76,
80-81 (2d Cir. 1998),
and Press-Enterprise Co.
v. Superior Court, 478 U.S. 1,
14 (1986). Because he made no
such application, this
Court was never called upon to
conduct such an analysis. In
sum, Avenatti’s belated
complaints about press access
to voir dire provide no
basis for this Court to
disturb the jury’s
verdict. CONCLUSION For
the reasons stated above,
Defendant’s post-trial motions
are denied. The Clerk of
Court is directed to terminate
the motions." Full order on
Inner City Press'
DocumentCloud here.
Jumpt
cut to January 19, 2023, when the Second Circuit
heard arguments on Avenatti's
appeal of his Nike conviction.
Inner City Press live
tweeted it, thread here:
OK - now Avenatti
appeal in 2d Circuit. His
(publicly paid) Federal
Defender Daniel Habib is
arguing for him
Judge Raggi: The government
is pointing us to the fact
that Nike could have not
hired Avenatti and still
paid him. How could the jury
not find that extortionate?
Avenatti's lawyer: It would
have been Nike's decision-
Judge Raggi: But it was not
a good faith offer
Avenatti's lawyer: Mr.
Franklin would have gotten
$1.5 million. And Mr.
Avenatti could have brought
the other employees' conduct
to the attention of Nike.
Judge Raggi: What about "pay
me double"? Avenatti's
lawyer: Garagos was
initially named in the
complaint
Avenatti's lawyer: SDNY was
investigating Nike -- Judge
Walker: How does that go to
the doubling of fees?
Avenatti's lawyer: It was a
disincentive to fire a
lawyer other than Avenatti.
Even if it was a bald
request for fees, it was
authorized by California law
Judge: Avenatti
offered to ride into the
sunset for $22.5 million.
Avenatti's lawyer: That
wasn't for him. Judge: Who
was it for? Avenatti's
lawyer: Mr. Franklin. Mr.
Avenatti left it up to Nike.
Judge: Avenatti said it made
no sense to pay so much to
Franklin
Judge Raggi: I don't
understand California to say
that a lawyer in settling
his client's claim can
solicit work from the
defendant and then be
representing them.
Avenatti's lawyer: It could
be done with consent. Judge
Raggi: But Mr. Franklin
didn't consent.
Judge Raggi: Who
would've Avenatti been
serving, in doing an
investigation for Nike? Tell
me how California permits
this. Avenatti's lawyer: We
put in evidence from a legal
ethics expert. Judge Raggi:
This is, charitably, a
curious negotiation.
Judge Raggi: Mr.
Avenatti made sure to try to
guarantee himself $12
million even if he did not
work. Avenatti's lawyer: But
he would have done more for
$15 million.
Now AUSA Matthew Podolsky:
Avenatti's was a request for
a bribe, and that is a
crime. App at 640.
But wait there's more:
Avenatti's lawyer: The
restitution order should be
vacated. Judge: We'll
take the case under
advisement.
The Nike
case was US v. Avenatti, 19-cr-373
(Gardephe).
The appeals are 21-1778-cr and 22-351-cr
***
Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA
Mail: Box 20047, Dag
Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2021 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com for
|
,
