Sam Bankman-Fried has withdrawn his motion for a new criminal trial, according to a Wednesday filing in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. The former FTX chief executive, currently serving a 25-year prison sentence, confirmed he consulted his parents while drafting the document but insisted he was the “ultimate author” of the submission.
The development follows a March 23 order from Judge Lewis Kaplan directing Bankman-Fried to clarify whether he received legal assistance on an earlier pro se filing, which is a motion filed without a licensed attorney.
US prosecutors had already raised doubts about whether Bankman-Fried filed an extension request independently, particularly after his mother, Barbara Fried, sent an unsolicited letter to the court on his behalf despite lacking legal standing to do so.
What Bankman-Fried Actually Conceded and What He Did Not
Bankman-Fried addressed the judge’s concern directly in his latest letter, writing: “I am the author of this letter, but did consult with my parents about it, since it concerns both of them.” That statement referred specifically to an extension he had sought to file a Rule 33 motion, the procedural vehicle defendants use to request a new trial based on newly discovered evidence or other grounds.
That Rule 33 motion has now been withdrawn entirely.
What remains active is a separate request Bankman-Fried submitted in February asking that a different judge preside over any future motions in his case. In that earlier filing, he accused Kaplan of showing “extreme prejudice” against him throughout the criminal proceedings. Neither the judge reassignment request nor Bankman-Fried’s separate appeal of his conviction and sentence at the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit was affected by Wednesday’s letter.
In his original Rule 33 motion, Bankman-Fried had claimed that the Justice Department under former President Joe Biden “threatened multiple witnesses into silence or into changing their testimony” during his 2023 criminal trial. That allegation formed the backbone of his argument for a fresh proceeding.
With the motion now dropped, that particular legal avenue is closed, though the appellate process continues independently.
Prison Filings, Pardon Hopes, and the Broader Legal Picture
Bankman-Fried was convicted in late 2023 on multiple counts of fraud and conspiracy tied to the collapse of FTX, once one of the largest cryptocurrency exchanges in the world by trading volume.
His sentencing to 25 years was among the stiffest penalties ever handed down in a financial crime case involving the crypto industry. As of the date of the Wednesday filing, he remains housed at the Federal Correctional Institution, Lompoc I, in California.
From prison, the former executive has pursued a public campaign alongside his legal strategy. He has used social media and interviews to signal interest in obtaining a presidential pardon from Donald Trump, posting messages on X that praised Trump’s crypto policy positions and military decisions.
Bankman-Fried has also pointed to his earlier financial support for political causes as context for why a pardon might be considered, though his connections to Democratic-aligned groups during the 2022 election cycle remain part of his complicated political legacy.
Those hopes have faced a visible setback. In a January New York Times interview, Trump stated plainly that he had no intention of pardoning Bankman-Fried.
Prediction markets registered a drop in the probability of a pardon following a separate interview that included remarks from Bankman-Fried’s parents, Barbara Fried and Joseph Bankman, both Stanford law professors who have been vocal in advocating for their son.
The withdrawal of the new trial motion narrows Bankman-Fried’s remaining formal legal options considerably. His strongest remaining avenue is the Second Circuit appeal, where his legal team is expected to challenge both the underlying conviction and the length of the sentence.
The judge reassignment request, meanwhile, is an unusual procedural move that courts grant only in rare circumstances, typically requiring substantial documented evidence of bias rather than disagreement with a judge’s rulings.
Legal observers have noted that Bankman-Fried’s filings from prison, several submitted without an attorney of record, carry inherent procedural risks that could complicate rather than strengthen his appellate arguments.
For the broader crypto industry, the continued legal saga surrounding FTX’s founder remains a live reminder of the regulatory and reputational consequences that followed the exchange’s November 2022 collapse.
FTX’s bankruptcy proceedings, which have involved the recovery and redistribution of billions of dollars to creditors, are ongoing in separate court proceedings entirely independent of the criminal case.
Not Financial Advice: This article is for informational purposes only. Crypto investments are highly volatile. Always do your own research.
