Trump and co-defendants ask appeals court to review ruling allowing Fani Willis to stay on Georgia election case


Former President Donald Trump and eight other defendants accused of illegally trying to interfere in the 2020 election in Georgia on Friday submitted a formal application to appeal a judge’s ruling allowing Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to remain on the case.

Trump and other defendants had tried to get Willis and her office tossed off the case, saying her romantic relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade created a conflict of interest. Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee earlier this month found that there was not a conflict of interest that should force Willis off the case but said that the prosecution was “encumbered by an appearance of impropriety.”

McAfee’s ruling said Willis could continue her prosecution if Wade left the case, and the special prosecutor resigned hours later. Lawyers for Trump and other defendants then asked McAfee to allow them to appeal his ruling to the Georgia Court of Appeals, and he granted that request.

The filing of an application with the appeals court is the next step in that process. The Court of Appeals has 45 days to decide whether it will take up the matter.

The allegations that Willis had improperly benefited from her romance with Wade upended the case for weeks. Intimate details of Willis and Wade’s personal lives were aired in court in mid-February, overshadowing the serious allegations in one of four criminal cases against the Republican former president. Trump and 18 others were indicted in August, accused of participating in a wide-ranging scheme to illegally try to overturn his narrow 2020 presidential election loss to President Biden in Georgia.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis looks on during a hearing at the Fulton County Courthouse on March 1, 2024, in Atlanta.
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis looks on during a hearing at the Fulton County Courthouse on March 1, 2024, in Atlanta.

Alex Slitz / Getty Images


The appeal application says McAfee was wrong not to disqualify both Willis and Wade from the case, saying that “providing DA Willis with the option to simply remove Wade confounds logic and is contrary to Georgia law.”

Steve Sadow, Trump’s lead attorney in the case, said in a statement that the case should have been dismissed and “at a minimum” Willis should have been disqualified from continuing to prosecute it. He said the Court of Appeals should grant the application and consider the merits of the appeal.

A spokesperson for Willis declined to comment.

Willis used Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations, or RICO, law, an expansive anti-racketeering statute, to charge Trump and the 18 others. Four people charged in the case have pleaded guilty after reaching deals with prosecutors. Trump and the others have pleaded not guilty.

McAfee clearly found that Willis’ relationship with Wade and his employment as lead prosecutor in the case created an appearance of impropriety, and his failure to disqualify Willis and her whole office from the case “is plain legal error requiring reversal,” the defense attorneys wrote in their application.

Given the complexity of the case and the number of defendants, the application says, multiple trials will likely be necessary. Failure to disqualify Willis now could require any verdicts to be overturned, and it would be “neither prudent nor efficient” to risk having to go through “this painful, divisive, and expensive process” multiple times, it says.

In his ruling, McAfee cited a lack of appellate guidance on the issue of disqualifying a prosecutor for forensic misconduct, and the appeals court should step in to establish such a precedent, the lawyers argue.

Finally, the defense attorneys argued, it is crucial that prosecutors “remain and appear to be disinterested and impartial” to maintain public faith in the integrity of the judicial system.



Source link

Trump, co-defendants ask appeals court to consider booting DA Fani Willis from Georgia case



Lawyers for former President Donald Trump and eight of his co-defendants in the Georgia election interference case on Friday asked a state appeals court to allow them to challenge a recent ruling that didn’t disqualify Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from prosecuting the case.

“The Georgia Court of Appeals should grant the application and accept the interlocutory appeal for consideration on the merits,” Steve Sadow, Trump’s lead attorney in Georgia, told NBC News in a statement Friday.

Willis’ office declined NBC News’ request for comment.

The application comes after Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee gave Trump and the others permission to seek a review from the Georgia Court of Appeals of McAfee’s decision not to disqualify Willis and her office and dismiss the charges in the sprawling racketeering case.

In a motion originally filed by Trump co-defendant Michael Roman, and later adopted by Trump and others, Willis is accused of financially benefitting from a personal relationship she had with Nathan Wade, a special prosecutor she’d appointed to the case. The motion alleged Willis and Wade took vacations together while working on the case.

Willis and Wade denied any wrongdoing. They acknowledged they’d been in a relationship, but they maintained that it began after his appointment as special prosecutor and that Willis did not benefit financially.

In a decision earlier this month, McAfee found no conflict of interest but said because of an “appearance of impropriety,” either Willis and her office would have to step aside, or Wade.

Wade resigned shortly after McAfee’s ruling — but, Sadow noted, the defense wanted the order to go further.

“Defendants argues in the trial court that the indictment should have been dismissed and, at a minimum, DA Willis and her office should have been disqualified from prosecuting the case,” Sadow’s statement said.

Trump has pleaded not guilty in the case, which alleges he conspired with others to overturn the 2020 election results in the state.

With the request officially filed, the appeals court has 45 days to decide whether to take up the case. McAfee has said he will not halt proceedings in the Georgia case as the disqualification matter makes its way through the appeals court.



Source link

Trump co-defendant’s struggle to find lawyers seen as ‘delay tactic’ by Florida lawyers



“I think that’s comical,” Gregorie said. “Here’s a guy from Palm Beach and he can find a lawyer in Washington, D.C., but in the busiest criminal district in the country, in the Southern District of Florida, he’s not able to find a lawyer? It’s almost funny.”

Appearing before a federal judge in Miami last week, De Oliveira, wearing a navy suit and glasses and without a local attorney, was unable to enter a plea. 

It was a reprise of the two delays that led Walt Nauta, Trump’s personal aide who is also indicted in the classified documents case, to postpone entering his not guilty plea. 

The district has no shortage of legal firepower, said Philip Reizenstein, a former Miami-Dade County prosecutor.

“We’re very active as defense attorneys,” Reizenstein said. “We don’t just roll over and plead guilty.”

Mark Schnapp, a veteran federal prosecutor who led the criminal division at the U.S. attorney’s office in Miami, said, “I don’t know what’s taking so long.” Schnapp said De Oliveira “had to know” he would be charged ahead of time. 

Typically the government will contact targets to let them know they’re going to be charged and offer them opportunities to cooperate, former prosecutors said.

A source familiar with the matter said De Oliveira’s legal team was informed ahead of time that the government intended to seek an indictment. The source said the defense was offered a chance to explain why he should not face charges.

But even after the charges were announced in a superseding indictment and De Oliveira made his first court appearance, his defense team was still working to lock down local counsel.

“This is a delay tactic,” said Dave Aronberg, the state attorney in Palm Beach County. “I’ll walk outside in a couple of minutes. I’m going to trip over at least three lawyers who are admitted into the Southern District of Florida. You’ve got to watch your step.”

“This is a delay tactic. I’ll walk outside in a couple minutes. I’m going to trip over at least three lawyers who are admitted into the Southern District of Florida. You’ve got to watch your step.”

— Dave Aronberg, Palm Beach County, Florida, state attorney

Yet despite the historic challenge of wanting to represent a former president, veterans of the South Florida legal world who spoke to NBC News said other issues could be complicating the decision. 

The cost of securing an attorney independent from Trump’s operation could prove a daunting challenge for workers targeted by federal investigators in the special counsel’s probes. 

Gregorie pointed to potential conflicts with Trump, who promised to find De Oliveira an attorney, according to the updated indictment. 

Trump’s Save America fundraising group spent at least $20 million on legal fees in the first half of the year, some of it with the firms of lawyers who have signed on to represent his employees, federal records show. 

For De Oliveira, a former maintenance worker at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate accused with him and Nauta of conspiring to subvert federal investigators’ efforts to retrieve sensitive classified documents from Trump in his post-presidency, the stakes could not be higher.

Prosecutors allege that De Oliveira lied to the government by denying he had any knowledge of boxes of classified files, despite his role in moving them, and then tried to delete security video at the Palm Beach club after the Justice Department sought to obtain it. Trump called De Oliveira, and the two spoke for more than 20 minutes, according to the indictment. 

He later approached another employee, identified as Yuscil Taveras, and informed him that “the boss” wanted the video deleted, prosecutors allege. That employee, who was once represented by a lawyer shared with another Trump defendant, sought new counsel last month. 

De Oliveira, who is set to appear before the federal judge assigned to the case Thursday, faces a delicate path that could lead to new challenges down the line.  

“This is a question of ‘how is this guy going to pay for his lawyer?’ And if he is being paid by Trump, that lawyer has got to say: ‘Listen, my job is to represent you. Some of the things I’m going to recommend to you may not be what Mr. Trump wants,’” Gregorie said. “That may be a real difficulty.” 

Former prosecutors for the Southern District said lawyers face their own liabilities, including the financial peril of a defendant who loses the means to pay or the threat of landing in the very public crosshairs of Trump’s ire.

If a lawyer signs on to a case in Florida and the defendant stops paying, “you’re stuck,” Schnapp said.

Reizenstein said: “Unspoken among my colleagues who wanted to work for the president — within a group of certain people who were being consulted — [was] a cost-benefit analysis. Literally there were lawyers who were asking themselves how much is your reputation worth. Because a lot of people who take on the representation end up getting damaged themselves.” 

“That was an undercurrent within the Miami legal community when he was looking for lawyers,” Reizenstein said of Trump. 

Said Kendall Coffey, a former U.S. attorney for Southern Florida: “Lawyers associated with Donald Trump have had bad luck.”



Source link