U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan denied Sam Bankman-Fried's motion for a new trial on April 28, 2026, ruling that the witnesses Bankman-Fried characterized as newly discovered were known to the defense before trial began [1][2]. Kaplan rejected Bankman-Fried's supporting claims as "wildly conspiratorial and entirely contradicted by the record" [3]. The judge separately denied Bankman-Fried's attempt to withdraw the motion, permanently closing that avenue of relief [1].
Bankman-Fried was convicted in November 2023 in the Southern District of New York on seven counts of fraud and conspiracy arising from the collapse of the FTX cryptocurrency exchange, and was sentenced to 25 years in March 2024 [2]. The post-conviction motion argued that witnesses whose testimony could have supported the defense were not available at trial, a claim that falls under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33, which permits a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence when the moving party demonstrates the evidence could not have been discovered with due diligence before trial [1]. Kaplan's order found that Bankman-Fried failed to satisfy that standard, because the defense was on notice of the witnesses in question before the proceedings concluded [1][3].
The ruling also addressed a separate line of argument implicating Bankman-Fried's mother, Barbara Fried, a Stanford Law professor whose behind-the-scenes involvement in the defense strategy had drawn scrutiny [1]. Kaplan's rejection of the motion's conspiratorial framing effectively disposes of any theory that improper external coordination tainted the proceedings or created grounds for relief at the district court level [1][3].
Bankman-Fried's direct appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit remains his sole remaining avenue [1][2]. That appeal centers on two substantive legal arguments: whether the district court improperly allowed the jury to consider conduct for which Bankman-Fried was acquitted during sentencing, and whether Judge Kaplan harbored bias that infected the proceedings [1]. The acquitted-conduct argument carries broader doctrinal significance, as the Supreme Court declined in 2024 to resolve a circuit split on the practice, leaving Second Circuit precedent in flux. Briefing in the appeal is ongoing, and no argument date has been publicly scheduled [1].