Sam Bankman-Fried has filed a new motion in a US federal court seeking another trial related to his fraud conviction tied to the collapse of crypto exchange FTX. The filing marks the latest legal effort by the former executive to overturn or revisit the verdict that resulted in a lengthy prison sentence.
The request was submitted to a New York court by Bankman-Fried’s mother, Barbara Fried, and argues that newly available evidence justifies reopening the case. The motion arrives after repeated attempts by the former FTX chief to challenge the outcome of his trial through appeals and post conviction filings. Bankman-Fried was sentenced to 25 years in prison after being found guilty on multiple counts related to wire fraud, securities fraud, and misuse of customer funds.
Court documents show that the latest filing was made on a pro se basis, meaning Bankman-Fried is currently representing himself rather than working through legal counsel. The submission spans 35 pages and claims that key testimony and evidence were absent from the original proceedings, undermining the fairness of the trial. To succeed, Bankman-Fried must convince the court that the information now being raised could not reasonably have been presented earlier and that it would likely have altered the jury’s verdict.
One of the arguments highlighted in the motion centers on the absence of testimony from former FTX executive Ryan Salame. Salame was convicted in a separate case and later became involved in legal disputes related to campaign finance violations connected to his wife, Michelle Bond. The filing suggests that Salame’s testimony could have provided context around internal decision making at FTX and the handling of funds, though prosecutors have previously argued that such details would not negate evidence of customer money being misappropriated.
Bankman-Fried has consistently argued that FTX was not insolvent at the time of its collapse and that the company’s failure was driven by liquidity pressures rather than fraud. Judges reviewing earlier appeals have rejected that framing, emphasizing that the case focused on whether customers were misled about how their assets were used. In previous hearings, appellate judges noted that solvency alone does not address allegations that investor funds were diverted without consent.
Federal prosecutors have maintained that Bankman-Fried knowingly misrepresented the safety of customer deposits and allowed those funds to be used for risky trading and political donations. The jury accepted that view during the original trial, leading to one of the most high profile convictions in the history of the crypto industry.
Political avenues for relief also appear closed. US President Donald Trump has publicly stated that he would not consider granting clemency to Bankman-Fried. Despite this, the former executive has continued to argue publicly that his prosecution was politically motivated, using social media to frame himself as a victim of government overreach.
The court has not yet indicated when it will rule on the request. Legal experts note that successful motions for a new trial are rare and typically require compelling evidence that directly challenges the foundation of the original conviction.
