Partial Verdict Announced In Dewey & LeBoeuf Criminal Trial

Dewey think they're guilty? Let's see what the jury had to say.

In what some lawyers have hailed as Biglaw’s trial of the century, a partial verdict has been reached in the criminal case against the former executives of failed firm Dewey & LeBoeuf.

The trial began in May and lasted until September, and after four months of heated litigation, ousted former chairman Steven Davis, ex-executive director Stephen DiCarmine, and former CFO Joel Sanders have waited for more than two weeks to learn their fates. In addition to fraud charges and charges related to the falsification of business records, they each face 15 counts of first-degree grand larceny. If convicted, they could serve up to 25 years in prison.

Jury deliberations were rocky, at best, with jurors sending notes to the judge detailing their confusion — they asked for the definition of the word “deliberation” and clarification on what their jobs were as jurors. Things were not going well, and industry insiders began to question whether the prosecution had properly done its job. Yesterday was the straw that broke the camel’s back, as jurors sent a note to the judge letting him know that they were deadlocked and unable to agree on a consensus on the majority of the charges.

Today, Justice Robert M. Stolz declared that the court would be taking a partial verdict over the objections of attorneys for DiCarmine and Sanders, as well as the prosecution. Justice Stolz, however, instructed jurors to convene, and the “crowd of spectators … swelled considerably” prior to the jury entering the courtroom, per Law360’s live coverage. While jurors filled out the verdict sheet, the defendants appeared “remarkably calm.”

Dewey think the executives blamed for the collapse of a storied Biglaw firm are guilty?

This is how the jury weighed in with its partial verdict.

Steven Davis

Sponsored

  • The jury found Davis not guilty of multiple counts of falsifying business records.
  • The jury remains deadlocked on several other counts of the same charge.
  • The jury has not reached a verdict on the scheme to defraud or grand larceny charges.
  • They jury has not reached a verdict on the securities fraud or conspiracy charges.

Stephen DiCarmine

  • The jury found DiCarmine not guilty of multiple counts of falsifying business records.
  • The jury remains deadlocked on several other counts of the same charge.
  • The jury has not reached a verdict on the scheme to defraud or grand larceny charges.
  • They jury has not reached a verdict on the securities fraud or conspiracy charges.

Joel Sanders

  • The jury found Sanders not guilty of multiple counts of falsifying business records.
  • The jury remains deadlocked on several other counts of the same charge.
  • The jury has not reached a verdict on the scheme to defraud or grand larceny charges.
  • They jury has not reached a verdict on the securities fraud or conspiracy charges.

Sponsored

In all, Davis was cleared of 19 counts of falsifying business records, DiCarmine on 17 of those counts, and Sanders on 13 of those counts. The jurors remain deadlocked, however, on the most serious charges. In an instant reaction to the partial verdict, Dow Jones writer Kevin Kingsbury called this a “big blow” to the Manhattan DA’s Office.

Defense attorneys requested that an Allen charge be read to the jury, and Justice Stolz reminded jurors that their verdict must be unanimous as he sent them back to conduct further deliberations. Dan Levine of Reuters Legal found this to be highly unusual, as a mistrial is usually declared on deadlocked counts, rather than instructions being given by the judge for continued deliberations.

For a jury that’s taken so long and only come this far — a jury that had to ask what it meant to deliberate, mind you — it’s worrisome that Justice Stolz would encourage them to deliberate any further. Perhaps a new jury on a retrial would be able to get a better grasp on the complicated financial charges involved in this case.

What do you think about the partial verdict in the Dewey case? Let us know your thoughts in the comments, or drop us a line. We’d love to hear from you.