Since its founding in or about September 2017 by, KuCoin has become one of the largest global cryptocurrency exchange platforms. As of in or about March 2024, according to its

public website, KuCoin had over 30 million customers located in at least 207 countries and territories, and, according to a third-party public website, its daily spot trading volume exceeded $2.8 billion. KuCoin’s website also touts public rankings of cryptocurrency exchanges that place KuCoin in the top five worldwide. As of December 2023, one of these public rankings listed KuCoin as the fifth largest c1yptocurrency spot exchange based on traffic, liquidity, and trading volumes, among other factors, and the fourth largest cryptocurrency derivatives exchange based on liquidity and normalized volume, among other factors.

Though KuCoin had customers from all over the world, it made itself susceptible to American banking and anti-money laundering regulations by soliciting business from American clients and institutions. As such, according to the Bank Secrecy Act and other related regulations, it was required to implement an anti-money laundering program and make reports of suspicious activity. The defendants are also indicted for allegedly conspiring to operate an unregistered money transmitting business.

According to a press release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office:

“[A]t all relevant times, KuCoin has been a money transmitting business required to register with the U.S. Department of Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) and, since July 2019, has been a futures commission merchant required to register with the U.S. Commodity and Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”). As a money transmitting business and a futures commission merchant, KuCoin is required to comply with the applicable Bank Secrecy Act provisions requiring maintenance of an adequate AML program, including customer identity verification, or know-your-customer (“KYC”) processes. AML and KYC programs ensure that financial institutions, such as KuCoin, are not used for illicit purposes, including money laundering.

GAN, TANG, and KuCoin were aware of their U.S. AML obligations but willfully chose to flout those requirements. KuCoin failed, for example, to implement an adequate KYC program. Indeed, until at least July 2023, KuCoin did not require customers to provide any identifying information. It was only in July 2023, after KuCoin was notified of a federal criminal investigation into its activities, that KuCoin belatedly adopted a KYC program for new customers. However, this KYC process applied to new customers only and did not apply to KuCoin’s millions of existing customers, including the substantial number of customers based in the United States. KuCoin also never filed any required suspicious activity reports, never registered with the CFTC as a futures commission merchant, and, through at least the end of 2023, never registered with FinCEN as a money transmitting business.

In fact, GAN, TANG, and KuCoin affirmatively attempted to conceal the existence of KuCoin’s U.S. customers in order to make it appear as if KuCoin was exempt from U.S. AML and KYC requirements. Despite the fact that KuCoin gathered and tracked location information for its customers, KuCoin actively prevented its U.S. customers from identifying themselves as such when opening KuCoin accounts. And KuCoin lied to at least one investor, in 2022, about where its customers were located, falsely representing that it had no U.S. customers when, in truth, KuCoin had a substantial U.S. customer base. In fact, in a number of social media posts, KuCoin actively marketed itself to U.S. customers as an exchange where they could trade without having to undergo KYC. For example, KuCoin stated in an April 2022 message on Twitter that “KYC is not supported to USA users, however, it is not mandatory on KuCoin to do KYC. Usual transactions can be done using an unverified account-“”

The named individual defendants face as much as twenty years in prison for their crimes. Given the amount of money that was trasmitted through the exchange, their sentencing exposure under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines stands to be significant, as well.

The proliferation of cryptocurrency and cryptocurrency exchanges operating internationally (like KuCoin) has presented serious anti-money laundering challenges for American regulators and law enforcement. However, operating an exchange has also become especially complicated in the modern world of cryptocurrency. The inherent complexity and volume of the business on these exchanges in some circumstances could be used as defenses by operators accused of doing so unlawfully. Matthew Galluzzo, a former Manhattan prosecutor, has successfully defended individuals in New York accused of operating unregistered or illegal money transmitting businesses. If you or a loved one have been arrested for such a crime, you should strongly consider contacting him about representation.

Common Desk Appearance Tickets from JFK Airport include 1) shoplifting offenses (Petit Larceny – PL 155.25, a Class A misdemeanor) at the JFK retail shops or duty-free stores, 2) misdemeanor possession of controlled substances (PL 220.03), 3) misdemeanor possession of a weapon, such as a knife or collapsable baton or brass knuckles (PL 265.01), 4) theft of services, such as failing to pay a bar or restaurant tab (PL 165.15), and 5) assault (PL 120.00, a Class A misdemeanor). However, there are many other possible offenses at JFK Airport that could result in Desk Appearance Tickets.

A Desk Appearance Ticket is the same thing as a criminal arrest and a conviction for a misdemeanor can give you a permanent and public criminal record. It can also potentially result in jail time, probation, fines, loss of employment, loss of immigration status, and loss of licensure, depending on the circumstances. These DATs must be taken seriously, as should any criminal arrest. Matthew Galluzzo has successfully helped over 100 clients earn dismissals in cases involving Desk Appearance Tickets, and has specifically helped over a dozen clients with charges stemming from JFK Airport.

Generally, a person who receives a Desk Appearance Ticket from JFK Airport must appear in Queens Criminal Court (located at 125-01 Queens Boulevard) as instructed by the ticket. Sometimes these court dates occur on weekends. Of course, many of the people arrested in JFK are travelers from out of town or even out of the country. In certain types of cases, Matthew Galluzzo has successfully appeared of behalf of many out-of-town and foreign clients and resolved these cases favorably without the clients having to appear personally. If you are a foreign or out-of-town client with a JFK Desk Appearance Ticket, you should strongly consider hiring Matthew Galluzzo to appear on your behalf, so that you do not have to make a special trip back to New York City just to appear in court to resolve a misdemeanor offense.

Matthew Galluzzo, a fluent French speaker, has successfully defended dozens of French citizens against serious charges brought in state and federal courts throughout America. For over a decade, he has served as the French Consulate’s Avocat-Conseil en Droit Pénal (Criminal Defense Lawyer). In that role he advised and assisted that institution on a wide range of issues pertaining to . In 2012, he was named a Young Leader in the French American Foundation, and he has been a regular radio and television commentator in French language media throughout Europe and Canada. He has also delivered several lectures about American criminal law to French law students in Paris and Versailles.

Some images from the ceremony are below.

The allegations in these cases suggest that the defendants used the public enthusiasm and fervor around cryptocurrency investing to run what amounted to a Ponzi scheme with a crypto appearance. The defendants allegedly went to crypto conventions and investor events and flashed conspicuous wealth in order to persuade people to invest in their cryptocurrencies. The defendants allegedly used a software platform to allow investors to see their investments growing, but the defendants would not allow the investors to withdraw funds. Meanwhile, these defendants allegedly used the investor funds for their own purposes and spent the money lavishly.

The defendants might argue that there was in fact a real cryptocurrency investment that simply failed, as so many cryptocurrencies have. (Some reputable economists might even argue that the entire cryptocurrency industry is, at base, a Ponzi scheme in and of itself.) Prosecutors will use bank records and other evidence to show that these investor accounts ran dry because they were emptied by the defendants.

The charges here are predominately conspiracies to commit Wire Fraud (18 USC 1343) and Money Laundering (18 USC 1956(h)). A person commits wire fraud, basically, when he or she commits fraud using the internet or a telephone system. Money laundering involves taking stolen money (or proceeds from an illegal activity) and knowingly converting it into another form or depositing it into a bank account, for example.

The defendants face significant potential prison sentences. Generally, the penalties for wire fraud and money laundering depend largely on the amount of money stolen. However, the penalties can increase significantly where there are many victims, or when a person acts as a manager of others in the criminal conspiracy, or when the person has a criminal record. In addition to prison penalties, the defendants, if convicted, can expect to owe their victims significant amounts in restitution.

Matthew Galluzzo is an experienced criminal defense attorney and former Manhattan prosecutor. He has successfully represented many individuals accused of federal wire fraud and money laundering and understands how prosecutors investigate and build their cases. If you or a loved one have been accused of wire fraud in federal court, you should strongly consider contacting him today to discuss his potential representation.

If you or a loved one have been arrested and charged with misdemeanor assault or forcible touching in New York City, you should strongly consider contacting the experienced team at the Law Office of Matthew Galluzzo PLLC. Their lead counsel is a former Manhattan prosecutor with considerable experience representing foreign citizens, with a strong track record of success.

These charges carry significant potential jail sentences, as well as enormous possible money forfeitures. If it is shown that anyone died as a result of an overdose from one of these illegally distributed pills, then the defendants could easily be facing sentences in excess of ten years or more.

The Law Office of Matthew Galluzzo PLLC has significant experience representing alleged narcotics traffickers in federal court, especially in cases involving opioids and fentanyl. If you or a loved one are a doctor, pharmacist, or other alleged to have participated in an doctor-centered scheme to distribute narcotics, you should strongly consider contacting the Law Office of Matthew Galluzzo PLLC. Their lead counsel has had success representing defendants accused of these crimes and has obtained good results.

Normally, in federal court, when a defendant chooses to plead guilty, he or she enters into a plea agreement with the prosecutors to establish certain terms and parameters for the sentencing. Plea agreements look like contracts and are usually at least five single-spaced pages long. A defendant acknowledges in the document that he/she is pleading guilty knowingly and voluntarily, and that he/she cannot take back the guilty plea once it has been entered before the court at a plea hearing. The agreements usually set forth the minimum and maximum possible penalties for the charged offenses, so that the defendant can acknowledge that he/she understands them. Also, a defendant agrees to plead guilty to certain charges in the indictment, and admits to certain conduct (for example, an amount of money fraudulently stolen, or a quantity of narcotics trafficked) that impacts the sentencing. Then, the parties to the plea agreement (the prosecutor and the defendant) agree to certain other factors (such as the defendant’s role in the offense, for example) that may establish where on the sentencing chart (for the Federal Sentencing Guidelines) that defendant’s sentence is likely to be. But, the agreements explicitly state that the ultimate decision as to the defendant’s sentence will be up to the sentencing judge to determine, based upon these established facts and parameters within the plea agreement, as well as the judge’s own considerations of the defendant and the defendant’s crime.

Here, in Ms. Loughlin’s case, the sentence has already been established by the agreement. This fact makes the agreement quite unusual for federal court, though hardly unprecedented. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C), Ms. Loughlin has agreed to plead guilty to conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud, and in exchange, she will receive a sentence of two months in prison, a fine of $150,000.00, 24 months of supervised release with 100 hours of community service, and a special assessment of $100. The prosecution also will agree to dismiss the remaining charges against Ms. Loughlin and not pursue any further charges in connection with what it knows about this affair. This all depends, however, upon the court accepting the agreement and Ms. Loughlin’s guilty plea.

Basically, pursuant to Rule 11(c)(1)(C), the court has to decide whether to accept this agreement with these terms before it will officially count. Tomorrow, during the sentencing hearing, the judge will ask Ms. Loughlin (with her attorney) whether she understands the agreement and its terms, and whether she is pleading guilty knowingly and voluntarily. The judge will then likely ask the prosecutor why the government feels this disposition is appropriate. Then, in the ensuing months, the prosecutor and the defense attorneys will submit written memoranda to the judge about why this disposition is appropriate. The defense memoranda will likely include a statement from Ms. Loughlin and supporting “character letters” from friends and family and people in the community. Ms. Loughlin will also undergo a biographical interview by a federal probation officer (usually a social worker) to be used to prepare a pre-sentence report about Ms. Loughlin for the judge. At the sentencing hearing, the court will indicate once and for all whether it considers the disposition to be appropriate. Assuming the judge does in fact find the disposition appropriate, the judge will sentence Ms. Loughlin as set forth in the agreement. In response, the prosecutor will move to dismiss the remaining criminal charges against Ms. Loughlin. If the court rejects Ms. Loughlin’s plea agreement, then the matter will start over as if Ms. Loughlin had not pleaded guilty.

These Rule 11(c)(1)(C) pleas can be advantageous in that they tend to provide more certainty for the parties. Normally, defendants plead guilty and find out their sentence at the sentencing date; sometimes the possible sentencing ranges can vary enormously. As a former state prosecutor accustomed to negotiating plea deals with fixed and expected penalties, it has always been somewhat confusing to me about how reluctant federal prosecutors are when it comes to these types of agreements. Federal prosecutors in New York and elsewhere routinely say “our office just doesn’t do that,” when asked about possible Rule 11(c)(1)(C) pleas. For whatever reason, most federal prosecutors just feel far more comfortable having courts decide upon appropriate sentences, rather than negotiate them themselves. Regardless, it seems highly unlikely here that Ms. Loughlin’s plea agreement will be rejected, or that she will not receive the expected sentence. The terms are not out of line with what other defendants in the “Varsity Blues” case have already received, and she might have received a sentence like this one with a “typical” open-ended plea agreement, anyway. Indeed, it might have been possible for her to avoid a prison sentence altogether in this case, but in light of the sentences handed out to other defendants by this court, it was probably in Ms. Loughlin’s best interests to eliminate the downside risk of receiving a more significant prison sentence by negotiating for this Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea.

If you or a loved one have been charged with federal mail or wire fraud, you should strongly consider contacting an experienced federal criminal defense attorney. Matthew Galluzzo, a former Manhattan prosecutor, regularly represents federal criminal defendants in federal courts across the country, and is a member of the Criminal Justice Act panels for both the Southern and Eastern District Courts of New York.

P.L. § 245.01 – Exposure of a Person

We’ll deal with this one first. Simply put, Exposure of a Person makes it a violation to expose one’s private parts in public. This statute is fairly straight forward enough.

Public Lewdness is just slightly more complicated…

P.L. § 245.00 – Public Lewdness

“Public Lewdness” generally applies when a person (a) in a public place, or (b) on private premises which may readily be observed from another private premises, (c) exposes the private or intimate parts of his or her body in a lewd manner, or (d) commits any lewd act. Lewd acts are not specifically defined in the Penal Law. The way the Public Lewdness statute is structured, a person need not be accused of actually exposing him or herself in order to be accused of violating it. For example, a person may be charged with this misdemeanor by masturbating over his clothes in a public place.

New York is rife with public places. A “public place” is defined as “one that is visible to a member of the passing public.” Common public places where defendants find themselves accused of engaging in lewd behavior are: bars, clubs, subway cars or platforms, lobbies or hallways, urinals or public transportation facility bathroom stalls (such as Penn Station or Port Authority), parks and vehicles.

Public Lewdness is a Class B misdemeanor which means being convicted of P.L. § 245.00 carries the following consequences:

• The accused is left with a permanent criminal record, with the added stigma of the Penal Law title being humiliating in nature;
• The conviction must be disclosed when the accused is asked if he/she has ever been convicted of a crime;
• The potential for up to 3 months of incarceration;
• The possibility of a term of Probation;
• Mandatory surcharges and victim assistance fees;
• Mandatory production of a DNA sample to be uploaded into New York’s Database for first time offenders.

Defending Public Lewdness and Exposure of a Person:

Pubic Lewdness and Exposure of a person are often charged together, since people accused of engaging in lewd acts are often concurrently alleged to have exposed themselves. If you find yourself charged with one or both, after either being brought to Central Booking or being issued a Desk Appearance Ticket, you should contact a lawyer immediately, for a myriad of reasons.

First, you’re being charged with a crime. Whether you have a voluminous criminal record or none at all, no one in jeopardy of criminal punishment should be without counsel. You can’t fight these charges – which are being brought by the NYPD and the local District Attorney – by yourself.

Second, just because you’ve been accused of a crime does not mean you deserve to be convicted of one. A good lawyer is going to fully debrief you on the facts of the case, explore any rushes to judgment or mistakes law enforcement may have made, highlight any flaws in their proof, and/or prepare mitigation on your behalf in an attempt to secure a result you can live with. These are tasks that an experienced criminal defense attorney should perform.

Every case is different, and every client is different. Although you may be accused of committing these fairly common crimes, there is a unique and custom-fit defense which needs to be prepared or you. Our team of former veteran prosecutors are experienced in dealing with the people who are tasked with prosecuting you, and know exactly what type of regimen needs to be put in place to secure the best result on your behalf. If you or a loved one is in the unfortunate situation of being faced with Public Lewdness and/or Exposure of a Person, call us now. Our professional team isn’t here to judge you – only to help.