LETTER MOTION addressed to Judge Lewis J.… — USA v. Chancy et al (Dkt. 33)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York · No. 1:20-cr-00378-LJL · Doc. 33 · 2020-10-05 · Docket on CourtListener

Summary

A letter motion dated October 5, 2020 from Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP, counsel for defendant Adedayo Ilori, to Judge Lewis J. Liman in United States v. Chancy, et al., No. 1:20-cr-00378-LJL, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Doc. 33. The letter asks the court to remove the electronic monitoring condition of his release and the nightly curfew. It recounts that he was released on March 4, 2020 on a $100,000 Appearance Bond and that the court later approved modifications, including replacing home detention with a curfew on July 31, 2020. Counsel cites a need for medical testing that cannot occur while he wears the bracelet, argues he is neither a flight risk nor a danger, and notes that co-defendants Herode Chancy and Michael Albarella are not under location monitoring. The government and Pretrial Services oppose the request.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
425 LEX INGTON AVENUE
NEW YORK, NY 10017-3954 
TELEP HONE: +1-212-455-2000
FACSIMILE: +1-212-455-2502 
Direct Dial Number 
+1-212-455-3070 
E-mail Address 
Brooke.Cucinella@stblaw.com 
B E I J I N G
H O N G  K O N G
H O U S T O N
L O N DO N
L O S  A N G E L E S
P A L O  A L T O
S Ã O  P A U L O
S E O U L
T O K Y O
W A S H I N G T O N ,  D . C .
BY ECF 
October 5, 2020  
The Honorable Lewis J. Liman 
United States District Judge 
Southern District of New York 
500 Pearl St. 
New York, NY 10007 
Re:
United States v. Chancy, et al., 20 Cr. 00378 (S.D.N.Y.)
Dear Judge Liman: 
I, along with my colleagues at Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP, represent Defendant 
Adedayo Ilori in the above-captioned action, and write to request a modification of Mr. Ilori’s 
conditions of release—specifically, to remove Mr. Ilori’s electronic monitoring condition.1  As 
described in more detail below, we believe this modification is appropriate given Mr. Ilori’s 
demonstrated behavior showing that he is neither a flight risk nor a danger to the 
community.  
On March 4, 2020, Mr. Ilori was ordered released on a $100,000 Appearance Bond 
secured by two financially responsible persons.  Among other conditions of his release, Mr. 
Ilori is subject to home confinement secured by electronic monitoring and is under 
supervision by the Pretrial Services Office of the Southern District of New York.  On March 
11, 2020, this Court, with the consent of the Government, approved a modification to the 
conditions of Mr. Ilori’s release such that his Appearance Bond could be co-signed by only 
one financially responsible person.   Wunmi Ilori, Mr. Ilori’s wife, was approved as the sole 
co-signer of Mr. Ilori’s Appearance Bond.  Further, on June 23, 2020, this Court, with the 
consent of the Government, approved a modification to the conditions of Mr. Ilori’s release to 
allow him to attend his daughter’s graduation on June 25, 2020.  Finally, this Court, again 
with the consent of the Government, approved a modification to the conditions of Mr. Ilori’s 
1
We understand that, should this request be granted, Pretrial Services will not be able 
to monitor Mr. Ilori for purposes of his nightly curfew.  Consequently, we also request 
that the curfew condition be removed as well. 
Case 1:20-cr-00378-LJL     Document 33     Filed 10/05/20     Page 1 of 3

Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
October 5, 2020 
The Honorable Lewis J. Liman 
2 
release to (i) replace his home detention condition with a nightly curfew and (ii) add an 
additional cosigner on July 31, 2020.  The additional co-signer was sworn to the appearance 
bond on August 4, 2020, and Mr. Ilori is now subject to a nightly curfew, secured by 
electronic monitoring. 
Mr. Ilori seeks to modify the conditions of his release for a number of reasons.  First, 
he needs the electronic monitoring device removed because he is in critical need of testing 
(including an MRI) and likely surgery, neither of which can occur while he is wearing the 
electronic monitoring bracelet.  Mr. Ilori’s history of knee pain is well-documented by his 
doctors at NYU Langone Medical Center (“NYU Langone”).  In 2018, Mr. Ilori was diagnosed 
with bilateral primary osteoarthritis of the knee, and arthritis of the right knee.  In 2019, Mr. 
Ilori’s doctors at NYU Langone identified patellofemoral instability of Mr. Ilori’s right knee, 
which presented with pain.  Presently, his doctors have informed him that an MRI is required 
to diagnose knee pain he is currently experiencing, which they anticipate may require 
surgery.  Additionally, wearing the ankle bracelet that is required for his electronic 
monitoring has exacerbated his knee pain, and removal of Mr. Ilori’s electronic monitoring 
bracelet would remove a significant contributing factor to his physical discomfort.   
Second, modification is appropriate because, as noted in the approved application for 
curfew in lieu of home detention, see ECF No. 25, the facts show that Mr. Ilori is neither a 
flight risk nor a danger to the community, and Mr. Ilori’s presence in court is reasonably 
assured by the Appearance Bond he, his wife, and his friend have all signed.   
With respect to flight risk, Mr. Ilori has demonstrated his intention to remain in the 
jurisdiction and return to court.  From the day he was charged, Mr. Ilori has complied with 
law enforcement:  he did not resist at the time of his arrest and has remained in faithful 
compliance with the conditions of his release to date, even though they have prevented him 
from fully pursuing his career and getting the medical attention he needs, and have caused 
him physical distress.  Additionally, Mr. Ilori’s family—including his wife and children—
reside in this district and he has no significant ties outside of the district that would present a 
risk of flight.  Further, Mr. Ilori’s wife remains subject to the $100,000 Appearance Bond—as 
does Mr. Ilori himself, and Mr. Deyal Roopnarine—which will ensure Mr. Ilori’s appearance 
at future court dates.   
As to the safety of the community, Mr. Ilori does not pose a threat to the community, 
as evidenced by the fact that he does not have a record of violent crime, nor has he 
demonstrated any such behavior since his arrest.   
Case 1:20-cr-00378-LJL     Document 33     Filed 10/05/20     Page 2 of 3

Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
October 5, 2020 
The Honorable Lewis J. Liman 
3 
Finally, we note that neither of Mr. Ilori’s co-defendants are subject to any location 
restriction programs or location monitoring.  See Dkt. No. 5 at 4 (Herode Chancy’s 
Appearance Bond, noting no location restriction programs), Dkt. No. 9 at 4 (Michael 
Albarella’s Appearance Bond, noting no location restriction programs).  Additionally, we note 
that Mr. Ilori is also subject to a bond in connection with state charges he is facing, which 
further guarantees he will remain in the district. 
In light of the foregoing, modifying Mr. Ilori’s conditions of release to remove 
electronic monitoring would present the least restrictive condition that would reasonably 
assure the appearance of Mr. Ilori and the safety of his community, without risk of 
exacerbating Mr. Ilori’s health conditions.   
We have spoken with AUSAs Cecilia E. Vogel and Tara M. La Morte, and Mr. Ilori’s 
pre-trial officer, and they oppose this request. 
Thank you for your consideration. 
Respectfully submitted, 
/s/ Brooke Cucinella
Brooke Cucinella 
Mark Stein 
cc: 
Counsel of record (by ECF) 
Case 1:20-cr-00378-LJL     Document 33     Filed 10/05/20     Page 3 of 3

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.nysd.540905.33.0.pdf

Size

96,716 bytes

SHA-256

5f50f5d565b3becdc2942b23f9f2abc7ba3db6df393f24bbfa23e9b81703ad41

Our copy

gov.uscourts.nysd.540905.33.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)