French developer Aurélien Michel is charged with Fraud for alleged $ 2.9 NFT’s rug pull
On January 4, 2023, French footballer, Aurélien Michel, was arrested by US authorities as he passed through JFK airport.
He was immediately taken into custody and brought before a federal judge in Brooklyn, where he was arraigned on a complaint charging him with being the leader of a scheme involving NFT fraud. He posted bail on February 1, 2023 and has been at liberty in the U.S. since that time.
In August 2023, the United States Sentencing Commission decided to change the way that some federal defendants’ criminal history scores are calculated for sentencing purposes. Previously, those found to have committed their crimes while “under any criminal justice sentence, including probation, parole, supervised release, imprisonment, work release, or escape status,” had two points added to their Criminal History category calculation, pursuant to USSG 4A1.1(d). The Sentencing Commission decided that not only would those two points no longer be added, but those who had been previously sentenced with these two points added to their calculation would be allowed to apply for retroactive re-sentencing. Basically, those individuals who previously were sentenced based upon Sentencing Guidelines calculations that included these two points in the Criminal History Calculation can now ask their sentencing courts to re-sentence them (beginning in February 2024). Not every defendant sentenced for a crime committed “while under any criminal justice sentence” will necessarily benefit from this amendment, as a two-point reduction for Criminal History may not necessarily change that person’s Criminal History Category. Moreover, some judges may not think that these amendments justify downward modifications of previously imposed sentences. Nonetheless, every defendant sentenced with these two points included in their sentencing calculation should strongly consider applying for a reduction in their sentence based upon this amendment and 18 USC 3582(2)(c).
Matthew Galluzzo has successfully applied for resentencing in other 18 USC 3582 cases, including modifications of sentences based upon US v. Davis and other changes in the law. He is an experienced federal criminal defense attorney and appellate lawyer and he offers a reasonable flat fee for an application to modify a federal sentence. Contact him today to discuss whether such a petition might benefit you or your loved one.
Last week, criminal defense attorney Matthew Galluzzo successfully persuaded a federal judge in Manhattan to sentence his client to a very favorable sentence. The client was guilty of selling fentanyl that led to the overdose death of a customer. Though there was no mandatory minimum for this offense, the Federal Sentencing Guidelines recommended a sentence of between 234 and 240 months in prison (i.e. approximately 20 years). The client had an extensive criminal record including, among other things, two prior felonies for drug trafficking and a conviction for a violent felony assault.
Mr. Galluzzo worked with a social worker to describe the client’s extremely difficult upbringing, which included parental abuse, poverty, homelessness, the foster care system, and drug abuse as a pre-teen. Mr. Galluzzo convinced the judge that pursuant to the recent Second Circuit decision in US v. Gibson, the client was not a Career Offender under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines despite his two prior convictions for NY Penal Law Section 220.39, resulting in his classification as a Criminal History Category IV instead of VI. He also convincingly described the overdose as a terrible accident and expressed his client’s remorse to the judge.
Ultimately, the Court granted a significant downward variance and gave him a sentence equal to roughly half that recommended by the Sentencing Guidelines, 120 months (10 years). The client was pleased with the result and felt that his voice had been heard. The case was US v. Huertero, 20-cr-580 (ER) before Judge Ramos.
Recently, former prosecutor Matthew Galluzzo appeared on PBS Channel 13 to explain several legal issues relating both the recent verdict in the Trump civil sex abuse trial and the new indictment of Congressman George Santos.
Matthew Galluzzo is a former sex crimes prosecutor who now represents both plaintiffs and defendants in civil sex abuse cases. He also regularly defends individuals accused of white collar crimes and fraud in federal court.
The link to the interview is available here.
Mr. Galluzzo, a criminal defense attorney and former New York City prosecutor, recently represented two individuals in separate federal grand jury investigations. The first individual received a grand jury subpoena in connection with an investigation into a fatal shooting. Mr. Galluzzo successfully persuaded federal prosecutors from the Southern District of New York that the client had a basis to invoke the Fifth Amendment should he be called to testify, and prosecutors agreed to withdraw the subpoena. The second individual received a subpoena to testify about an investigation into several fatal drug overdoses in Westchester County potentially linked to the same drug dealer. Mr. Galluzzo negotiated on behalf of his client, and he was able to answer the prosecutor’s questions informally in his office with the protection of a proffer agreement, instead of under oath and before the grand jury. Both of these clients were relieved not to have to testify in the grand jury and were generally thrilled with the outcome of Mr. Galluzzo’s negotiations.
If you or a loved one receives a grand jury subpoena, you need to contact a criminal defense attorney immediately. This subpoena cannot be ignored, but can carry substantial risks for the person who receives it. In some cases, the person receiving the subpoena may be able to assert the Fifth Amendment. In other cases, it may be possible to negotiate immunity from prosecution in exchange for testimony. In other cases, it may be possible to simply answer investigators’ questions without doing so under oath and before a grand jury. In that latter case, it is critical to only speak with an attorney’s assistance and after entering into a proffer agreement. Mr. Galluzzo has represented dozens of witnesses and cooperating witnesses over the years, and understands hos prosecutors think and build cases (as he himself is a former prosecutor). If you have received a grand jury subpoena from a prosecutor in the Southern or Eastern Districts of New York, you should strongly consider contacting him immediately.
Mr. Galluzzo recently obtained an excellent result for a client in Brooklyn federal court charged with Conspiracy to Commit Access Device Fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 1029(b)(2) and (c)(1)(A)(ii). The client pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement with a sentencing range under the Guidelines of 12-18 months in prison. Following the client’s guilty plea, Mr. Galluzzo presented to the federal judge the evidence of the defendant’s background, his immigration to the United States, his family, and his employment history. With a persuasive sentencing memorandum – including supporting documents and letters from the client’s family – Mr. Galluzzo successfully persuaded the federal judge to sentence the client to just over 7 months in prison, instead of the 12-18 months recommended by the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.
The truth of the matter is that the vast majority of federal defendants plead guilty. It is important for federal defense attorneys to be skillful in negotiating favorable plea bargains. But even more important for a federal defense attorney is the ability to craft persuasive sentencing arguments. These can make a real difference for federal defendants – sometimes it is the difference between a long sentence and a short sentence, or a sentence of probation instead of a prison sentence.
Matthew Galluzzo is a former Manhattan prosecutor and experienced federal criminal defense attorney. If you or a loved one have been charged with a federal crime, you should strongly consider retaining him. His significant experience advocating for defendants in federal court helps him obtain excellent results for his clients.
This week, Mr. Galluzzo obtained an excellent result for a client charged with a federal misdemeanor crime in Central Islip (EDNY) federal court.
The client, an attorney, was originally issued a summons by a park ranger for allegedly engaging in obscene conduct in a federal park in Fire Island. The summons suggested that he should resolve the case by paying a fine. However, such a guilty plea through the mail would have resulted in him being convicted of a federal misdemeanor crime. The client instead elected to go to court with Mr. Galluzzo as his counsel.
At the first appearance in federal court, Mr. Galluzzo spoke to prosecutors about the client’s exceptional background and the impact that a criminal conviction would have on his future and his career. The prosecutor was thus persuaded to dismiss the criminal charges in exchange for a $50 fine, which the client was happy to pay to resolve the matter.
Last Friday, Matthew Galluzzo achieved another great sentencing result for a client in a New York City federal case. The client had pleaded guilty to a long list of violent crimes, including participating in a robbery that resulted in a homicide. Pursuant to the federal Sentencing Guidelines, the client faced a recommended sentence of life. Taking several other factors into consideration, the Department of Probation recommended that the judge impose a sentence of 96 months, or eight years, instead of the life sentence recommended by the federal Sentencing Guidelines.
Mr. Galluzzo submitted a sentencing memorandum that the judge described at sentencing as “very compelling,” and sentenced the client to time served, equivalent to 51 months. The client – who had spent the last 4+ years in various facilities including MCC New York and MDC Brooklyn, was released from the courthouse and went straight home. Obviously, he was elated with the result, which about half of the sentence recommended by Probation and considerably less than that recommended by the Sentencing Guidelines.
Most federal defendants plead guilty. Indeed, statistics show that almost 98% of federal defendants plead guilty to some crime. Oftentimes, a defense attorney’s most valuable contribution in a case is at the sentencing phase. There, criminal defense attorneys must make the most persuasive case for leniency. Mr. Galluzzo spends time to really understand his client and his history in order to make the best arguments to the judge. As a result of his hard work, he consistently gets his clients sentences below those recommended by the US Sentencing Guidelines, with this last case being a particularly striking example.
Recently, Matthew Galluzzo obtained an excellent result for a client in federal court. One of four co-defendants in a conspiracy to ship stolen cars to Africa, our client was charged with violating 18 USC Section 2312. As alleged in the indictment, the group shipped millions of dollars of stolen and fraudulent-obtained cars to Africa (primarily Ghana). Galluzzo’s client pleaded guilty and faced a sentencing range of 10-16 months under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines (offense level 12 and Criminal History Category I).
Mr. Galluzzo submitted to the court a detailed sentencing memorandum describing the client’s difficult upbringing and hard work providing for his family. Mr. Galluzzo submitted character letters from the client’s family, friends and pastor in support of his good character and reputation. The court reviewed these submissions and, after a sentencing hearing in the Southern District of New York, decided not to impose an additional prison sentence upon him. The client will be on supervised release and able to continue with his current employment. (The client spent about six days in prison before arranging for the posting of his bail at the outset of the case and following his arrest.)
In addition, the client could have been subject to millions of dollars in restitution, meaning he might have been ordered to pay back money to the conspiracy’s victims to compensate them for the crimes. However, Mr. Galluzzo argued to the Court that such an award would have been unfair in his client’s case, given his minor role in the offense and his limited finances. The Court agreed not to impose any forfeiture or restitution penalties, as well.
This week, American law enforcement officers arrested Aurelien Michel, a French national living in the UAE, as he passed through JFK International Airport in New York City. He has since been arraigned before a federal magistrate judge in the Eastern District of New York (Brooklyn) on federal wire fraud charges, pursuant to 18 USC Section 1343. A complaint unsealed in federal court alleges that Mr. Michel advertised and marketed a series of Mutant Ape NFTs (non-fungible tokens) and collected nearly three million dollars in sales of various cryptocurrencies from numerous buyers and investors. However, it is further alleged that Mr. Michel never delivered the NFTs to his investors, but instead transferred this money to various accounts controlled by him. The complaint alleges that he later apologized on the platform Discord for the “rug pull” (i.e. a slang term for failing to deliver after receiving funds) because the community had become too “toxic.”
It would appear from the complaint that Mr. Michel has an obvious defense that he did not intend to defraud anyone, and that he fully intended to give his customers their NFTs eventually. He may have received the funds and then encountered difficulty in acquiring the NFTs for his customers due to volatile market conditions or other issues.
It is always difficult to estimate sentencing exposure at this stage of a criminal case, but preliminary estimates might suggest the following for Mr. Michel:
Firm News and Legal Information Center