First MOTION for Downward Departure MOTION… — First MOTION for Downward Departure MOTION TO STAY PROSECUTION… (Dkt. 107)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey · No. 1:24-cr-00267-KMW · Doc. 107 · 2025-08-21 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

1 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA  
: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
: 
v.  
 
 
 
: 
CRIM.NO.24-cr-267 (KMW) 
 
 
 
 
: 
ADRIENNE PONZO 
 
 
: 
  
 
 
MOTION TO STAY PROSECUTION AND TO JOIN THE GIRAUD LITIGATION 
CHALLENGING THE AUTHORITY OF ALINA HABBA AS ACTING UNITED 
STATES ATTORNEY FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 
 
TO:  
Honorable Karen M. Williams 
                        United States District Judge 
 
 
District of New Jersey 
 
 
Defendant Adrienne Ponzo, through undersigned counsel Troy A. Archie, respectfully 
moves for entry of an order staying this prosecution and permitting her to join or intervene in the 
consolidated litigation pending before Chief Judge Matthew W. Brann concerning the lawfulness 
of Alina Habba’s service as Acting United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey. This 
relief is necessary to protect Ms. Ponzo’s due process rights, avoid inconsistent outcomes, and 
prevent unconstitutional prejudice arising from prosecutorial actions authorized or supervised by 
an official whose authority multiple federal courts have held to be unlawful. 
 
 
On August 21, 2025, Chief Judge Brann issued a detailed seventy-seven-page opinion 
concluding that Ms. Habba has not lawfully exercised the functions and duties of the United 
States Attorney for this District since July 1, 2025, that her actions since that date may be 
declared void, and that she must be disqualified from participating in any ongoing criminal 
matters. United States v. Giraud, Case 1:24-cr-00768-MWB Doc.144, Memorandum Opinion 
dated Aug. 21, 2025, at 2–3.   The opinion explains that her continued service was the result of a 
series of unlawful maneuvers designed to circumvent the statutory limits imposed by 28 U.S.C. § 
546(c), the judicial-appointment mechanism of § 546(d), and the Federal Vacancies Reform Act. 
The court further held that § 546(d) is a judicial “hard stop” that prevents the Executive from 
extending interim service beyond the 120-day statutory limit or by installing post-vacancy “first 
assistants” to manufacture succession.  
Case 1:24-cr-00267-KMW     Document 107     Filed 11/26/25     Page 1 of 4 PageID: 650

2 
 
 
 
The ACDL-NJ’s amicus submission Case 1:24-cr-00768-MWB Doc. 112 underscores 
that these defects are not confined to the defendants in Giraud and Pina, but have district-wide 
consequences affecting hundreds of prosecutions. That filing emphasizes that the Government 
has asserted the unprecedented position that Ms. Habba may continue supervising all pending 
matters even if her appointment is unlawful, a position that raises systemic constitutional 
concerns for all defendants in the District of New Jersey.  
 
 
The Third Circuit heard the Habba appeal on October 20, 2025, with oral arguments 
taking place in Philadelphia. No decision has been issued to date.  However, Federal courts 
outside this District have already granted relief under materially similar circumstances. In United 
States v. James and United States v. Comey, judges of the Eastern District of Virginia dismissed 
indictments where an unlawfully appointed Interim U.S. Attorney was the sole prosecutor 
presenting cases to the grand jury, holding that violations of § 546 and the Appointments Clause 
rendered the proceedings invalid.     These rulings further demonstrate the fundamental 
importance of ensuring that criminal prosecutions proceed only under lawfully appointed 
officials. 
 
 
Although the indictment in this matter was signed by a duly authorized United States 
Attorney, subsequent prosecutorial decisions affecting Ms. Ponzo—including plea negotiations, 
approvals, supervisory reviews, authorizations, and strategic determinations—have occurred 
under Ms. Habba’s asserted authority. Under Chief Judge Brann’s August 21, 2025 decision, 
such actions may be void, and Ms. Habba may not legally participate in any ongoing cases. 
Proceeding in this posture exposes Ms. Ponzo to structural constitutional harm. If she accepts a 
plea offer, the validity of the negotiation may later be challenged as ultra vires. If she rejects it, 
she may lose the benefit of a resolution that was never lawfully authorized. Any continued 
litigation risks inconsistent outcomes, void proceedings, and irreparable unfairness to Ms. Ponzo. 
 
 
The issues presented here overlap entirely with those being litigated in Giraud and Pina 
and cannot be meaningfully separated from them. Consistency, judicial economy, and equal 
protection of the law require that Ms. Ponzo be permitted to join or adopt the arguments already 
Case 1:24-cr-00267-KMW     Document 107     Filed 11/26/25     Page 2 of 4 PageID: 651

3 
 
fully briefed before Chief Judge Brann. Numerous matters have already been stayed pending 
resolution of these issues, and continued litigation in this case would risk producing inconsistent 
rulings within the same District on the same fundamental question: whether Ms. Habba 
possessed lawful authority to exercise prosecutorial power. 
 
 
For these reasons, Ms. Ponzo respectfully requests that the Court stay all proceedings in 
Criminal No. 24-cr-267 (KMW), including the sentencing currently scheduled for December 3, 
2025 at 11:00 a.m. and pending the Third Circuit’s final decision in United States v. Habba and the 
consolidated Giraud litigation  pending issuance of the Third Circuit’s ruling in the Giraud 
matters; permit her to join or intervene in the consolidated Giraud and Pina litigation and any 
related appellate proceedings; direct the Government to state what procedures govern 
supervisory approvals within the U.S. Attorney’s Office while Ms. Habba’s authority remains in 
dispute; and grant such further relief as the Court deems just and proper. 
 
Dated: November 26, 2025   
 
 
Respectfully submitted, 
/s/ Troy A. Archie, Esq.  
Attorneys for Defendant Adrienne Ponzo 
AFONSO ARCHIE LAW P.C. 
21 Route 130 South 
Cinnaminson, NJ 08077 
Phone: (856) 786-7000 
Email:  archie@aanjlaw.com 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Case 1:24-cr-00267-KMW     Document 107     Filed 11/26/25     Page 3 of 4 PageID: 652

4 
 
 
 
 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
 
 
 
The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing served via 
the Electronic Case Filing this 26th day of November, 2025, upon the following: 
 
Daniel Aaron Friedman, AUSA 
Jason M. Richardson, AUSA 
U.S. Attorney's Office - District Of New Jersey 
401 Market Street 
Camden, NJ 08101 
 
Defendant`s Counsel 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Respectfully submitted, 
 
 
/s/ Troy A. Archie, Esq.   
Attorneys for Defendant Adrienne Ponzo 
AFONSO ARCHIE LAW P.C. 
21 Route 130 South 
Cinnaminson, NJ 08077 
Phone: (856) 786-7000 
Email:  archie@aanjlaw.com 
 
 
 
Case 1:24-cr-00267-KMW     Document 107     Filed 11/26/25     Page 4 of 4 PageID: 653

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.njd.546706.107.0.pdf

Size

183,285 bytes

SHA-256

9a568b7d7cb83e473fed97ec5f1562f2f12b2f6df317617bb22d3f4ca1e68601

Our copy

gov.uscourts.njd.546706.107.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)