Court filing
Transcript of Proceedings, February 13, 2025 — United States v. Kao, No. 1:21-cr-00061 (D. Haw.), Dkt. 184
Summary
This is a transcript of the February 13, 2025 hearing, which began at 3:45 p.m., on the plaintiff's motion for an order applying defendant Martin Kao's bond deposit to the special assessment and restitution, before the Honorable Kenneth J. Mansfield, United States Magistrate Judge. Craig Nolan argues for the Government that Kao posted $2 million with no third-party surety. Philip Miyoshi, for Tiffany Jennifer Lam, argues she has a marital interest in the funds, at least in up to $1.5 million of the bond amount; the Court says it will unseal ECF 14 as redacted and allows Kao to file anything further on the 27th. The transcript certificate is dated June 28, 2025.
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
Cite this document
“Transcript of Proceedings, February 13, 2025 — United States v. Kao, No. 1:21-cr-00061 (D. Haw.), Dkt. 184.”
Original at ecf.hid.uscourts.gov, No. 1:21-cr-00061-LEK, Doc. 184. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/court-filings/ppp-attempt-conspiracy-legal-filings/undated-gov-uscourts-hid-154418-184-0-gov-uscourts-hid-154418-184-0/
, SHA-256 2e35e8a02cb21e643f0854014476f3c8b2d13b1f9ce88a78f8b929e8280e8e7e.Full text
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 1 of 17 PageID.2216
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Case No. 21-CR-00061-LEK
)
Plaintiff, ) February 13, 2025
) 3:45 p.m.
vs. )
)
MARTIN KAO, )
)
Defendant. )
______________________________ ___ )
TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER AUTHORIZING
APPLICATION OF DEFENDANT'S BOND DEPOSIT TO PAYMENT OF SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT AND RESTITUTION AS TO DEFENDANT MARTIN KAO
BEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH J. MANSFIELD
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiff: Craig S. Nolan, Esq.
Sydney Spector, Esq.
U.S. Attorney's Office
300 Ala Moana Boulevard, #6-100
Honolulu, HI 96850
For Defendant: Victor J. Bakke, Esq.
Topa Financial Center
700 Bishop Street, Suite 2100
Honolulu, HI 96813
For Tiffany Jennifer Lam: Philip Miyoshi, Esq.
Miyoshi & Hironaka, LLLC
201 Merchant Street, Suite 2240
Honolulu, HI 96813
Transcription Service: Jessica B. Cahill, CER/CET-708
Maukele Transcribers, LLC
467 Maukele Place
Wailuku, Maui, HI 96793
Telephone: (808)298-8633
Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording;
transcript produced by transcription service.
2
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 2 of 17 PageID.2217
1 FEBRUARY 13, 2025 3:45 P.M.
2 THE CLERK: The United States District Court for the
3 District of Hawaii, with the Honorable Kenneth J. Mansfield,
4 United States Magistrate Judge, presiding, is now in session.
5 The gallery may be seated.
6 Criminal case number CR-21-00061LEK, United States of
7 America vs Martin Kao. This case has been called for United
8 States' motion hearing.
9 Please make your appearance for the record, starting
10 with the Government.
11 MR. NOLAN: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Craig Nolan
12 and Sydney Spector for the Government.
13 THE COURT: Good afternoon to both of you.
14 MR. BAKKE: And good afternoon, Your Honor. Attorney
15 Victor Bakke on behalf of Mr. Kao, who's present to my right.
16 THE COURT: All right. Good afternoon to both of you
17 as well. You folks can be seated. I did listen to most, if not
18 all, of your proceedings upstairs, so I could be sure I knew what
19 happened. Really the very end was what was material to me in
20 terms of whether there was an assessment of fine, restitution, or
21 penalty and to what degree.
22 So I'm aware of what happened there, and I've reread
23 the briefs that you folks filed and we discussed briefly last
24 time. So I guess I'd certainly like to hear from both of you as
25 to where you, each of you, think we stand today.
3
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 3 of 17 PageID.2218
1 MR. NOLAN: Well, I mean, it's our motion, so I'll just
2 briefly say --
3 THE COURT: That's fine.
4 MR. NOLAN: -- we think the law is clear. He posted $2
5 million as required by the Court. There was no third-party
6 surety, and the law is clear that the Government can ask the
7 Court for this money, and the Court will give us this money if --
8 we've got, you know, 12.8 million in restitution that's
9 outstanding at this point. We've got forfeiture. There's no
10 fine as the Court heard. He owes the Court itself $900 for the
11 special assessments.
12 So we're way above the 2 million. We don't think
13 there's any defense to the motion.
14 THE COURT: Okay. When I was rereading the briefs, and
15 I think this may be what Mr. Bakke wants to talk to me about, the
16 statute says any money belonging to and then deposited by or on
17 behalf of the Defendant. And I read a couple cases about that
18 belonging to any third parties. What argument or what evidence
19 does the Government have that the $2 million belongs to the
20 Defendant?
21 MR. NOLAN: So first, that the Government -- excuse me
22 -- that the Defendant himself was ordered to post $2 million.
23 Though his wife may have procured the check from their shared
24 account, that is his money, and it was posted on his behalf in
25 his name. The Court has a sealed document that I don't have.
4
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 4 of 17 PageID.2219
1 THE COURT: I have it in front of me.
2 MR. NOLAN: Yeah. So I don't know what that looks
3 like, and maybe the Court is willing to enlighten us. But in any
4 event, no matter what the state law here may be on how property
5 is treated, and there are millions and millions of dollars out
6 there in their joint names, it was posted on his behalf. There
7 was no third-party surety and under the circumstances --
8 THE COURT: And I agree with all of that, but it's the
9 belonging to part of the statute that I also have to comply with.
10 MR. NOLAN: It came from his account, and he posted it.
11 THE COURT: What can you tell me about the account?
12 Because I don't know anything about the account that it was drawn
13 from, if you know.
14 MR. NOLAN: Well, handed here today we have a
15 declaration from his wife. And so according to his wife's
16 declaration, she contacted Merrill Lynch to withdraw the funds
17 totaling $2 million. Mr. Kao was, of course, incarcerated at
18 that point. He was detained at FDC. She requested that Merrill
19 Lynch issue $2 million cashier's check from the Merrill Lynch
20 account, and it was one of the accounts in both their names. She
21 delivered the check.
22 So in any joint account, either owner has full access
23 to that money and has full right to that money. Whatever else
24 there may be out there, I don't know if there's a prenup or
25 something along those lines, but it's a declaration from his wife
5
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 5 of 17 PageID.2220
1 in support of essentially a motion to intervene and prevent this
2 from happening.
3 THE COURT: Was that filed in this case?
4 MR. NOLAN: No.
5 THE COURT: I haven't seen that.
6 MR. NOLAN: No, it was handed to --
7 THE COURT: Okay.
8 MR. NOLAN: -- Mr. Bakke and me literally as we walked
9 into the courtroom --
10 THE COURT: Okay.
11 MR. NOLAN: -- by her attorney. So it's all new to me.
12 But, frankly, it's pretty good proof that the money came from
13 their joint account. And, you know, he -- it's his property. If
14 he wants it, he used it by depositing it here, and he can't make
15 it safe by leaving it with the Court.
16 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.
17 MR. BAKKE: I'm sorry, Your Honor.
18 THE COURT: Mr. Bakke?
19 THE COURT: Your Honor, I'm sorry. First of all, Mr.
20 Nolan just referenced to a sealed document. What --
21 THE COURT: I believe he's referring to ECF 14, which
22 is the affidavit by owner of cash bail that's in the docket.
23 MR. BAKKE: Oh, okay. I haven't seen it.
24 MR. NOLAN: We haven't seen it, it's sealed.
25 THE COURT: Well, how about, for starters, I'll give it
6
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 6 of 17 PageID.2221
1 to each of you, and we can talk about whether to -- your client
2 signed it, Mr. Bakke. Presumably -- I mean, it was after you
3 were involved in the case when he signed it. I have it in front
4 of me.
5 MR. BAKKE: He may not have signed it with me. He's
6 had like --
7 THE COURT: It was during COVID, I recognize that.
8 MR. BAKKE: In fact, then it probably -- I was his
9 lawyer at the very beginning --
10 THE COURT: Right.
11 MR. BAKKE: -- for like a couple days.
12 THE COURT: And this is after that. I checked the
13 docket. This is 14 on the docket. You were his lawyer when he
14 signed this.
15 MR. BAKKE: I was his lawyer when he signed it?
16 THE COURT: I'm almost positive. I can pull up the
17 docket again.
18 MR. BAKKE: Okay. It's been a couple years, and he's
19 had like --
20 THE COURT: Okay. At a minimum, you need to see this
21 document, sir.
22 MR. BAKKE: Yeah, yeah.
23 THE COURT: Take a look. We'll start with you. We'll
24 take this in baby steps. If you can give a copy of this to Mr.
25 Bakke.
7
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 7 of 17 PageID.2222
1 (Counsel reviews document)
2 MR. BAKKE: According to my client, when he got out, he
3 signed this at Attorney Michael Green's office because I was only
4 his attorney for, like, a day or two. (Indiscernible - Mr. Bakke
5 standing away from microphone) --
6 THE COURT: Okay. But you read what it said.
7 MR. BAKKE: -- until like a year later.
8 THE COURT: Did you read what it says, Mr. Bakke?
9 MR. BAKKE: Oh, I read what it says. Yeah, my
10 client acknowledges --
11 THE COURT: Disavows that?
12 MR. BAKKE: No, no, no, he acknowledges. That's what
13 I'm saying, he just --
14 THE COURT: Okay.
15 MR. BAKKE: He signed it with Mr. -- with Attorney
16 Michael Green.
17 THE COURT: Sure.
18 MR. BAKKE: I don't have any personal knowledge to
19 that.
20 THE COURT: Okay. All right. Okay. So in light of
21 this information, which is what I have about whose money this is,
22 what's your argument?
23 MR. BAKKE: You know, having seen that, first of all,
24 now for the first time --
25 THE COURT: That's why I wanted you to see it.
8
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 8 of 17 PageID.2223
1 MR. BAKKE: Yeah. Your Honor, I -- I mean, I think the
2 law is fairly clear. I think the whole issue is that if the
3 money is encumbered prior to being posted, then there's a
4 legitimate third-party interest that can raise it. What he can't
5 do is encumber it after it's been posted.
6 So to make things a little more complicated, today,
7 Attorney Philip Miyoshi -- oh, there he is back there.
8 THE COURT: Good afternoon, Mr. Miyoshi.
9 MR. BAKKE: Mr. Miyoshi is behind me. So he's
10 representing Ms. Lam. So I have not had a chance to read through
11 his document that he, I guess, tried to file with the Court. Me
12 and the Prosecutor both just got this. But I can -- maybe he can
13 summarize the position, but really I would have to defer to him.
14 I have no knowledge of the marital assets and how that goes
15 through.
16 But I believe the Court is taking the right analysis,
17 which is, who does that money belong to? And whether or not --
18 if it's jointly owned, does that make it encumbered to the point
19 where Ms. Lam, the wife, would have her own ability to, almost
20 like an interpleader, come in and fight for the money?
21 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Miyoshi.
22 MR. MIYOSHI: Yeah. Thank you, Your Honor. And I
23 apologize for not making a appearance through the eFiling system.
24 I attempted to do that prior to the hearing today. It wouldn't
25 allow me to do that because I wasn't a party to this case. I
9
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 9 of 17 PageID.2224
1 attempted to file it manually with the Court, but was advised
2 that because I'm an attorney, I can only eFile something. So I
3 was left with --
4 THE COURT: Okay.
5 MR. MIYOSHI: -- between a rock and a hard place there.
6 But, Your Honor, we do represent Ms. Lam in this matter, and I
7 did provide both counsel with a memorandum. I would be happy to
8 provide it with you if I could -- I understand that might be a
9 little unorthodox and that you might want me to do whatever I can
10 to eFile it so you can get it through the proper channels, but I
11 do have a copy of this. But our --
12 THE COURT: Why don't you just file it with us? I
13 think we can do it the old fashioned way.
14 MR. MIYOSHI: May I approach, Your Honor?
15 THE COURT: Yes, please. And the Government and Mr.
16 Bakke have copies?
17 MR. MIYOSHI: I had provided them before the hearing.
18 Yeah.
19 MR. NOLAN: We do.
20 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Just let me -- give me a
21 second.
22 MR. MIYOSHI: Sure.
23 (Court reviews document)
24 THE COURT: Okay. I've skimmed the facts section, then
25 there's the legal argument, so I'm going to pause and not try to
10
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 10 of 17 PageID.2225
1 digest that on the fly. But go ahead, Mr. Miyoshi.
2 MR. MIYOSHI: Thank you, Your Honor. You know, in
3 summary -- and, you know, again, I don't want to take up the time
4 of the two counsel here, but in summary, you know, our position
5 is that Ms. Lam has a marital interest in those funds. I think
6 the law under -- with respect to 28 U.S.C. 2044 is clear. The
7 Government bears the burden of establishing that that money, as
8 this Court noted, belongs to the Defendant, so that it could be
9 applied to restitution.
10 We believe that the evidence shows that Ms. Lam has an
11 interest at least in up to $1.5 million of the bond amount
12 because of the amount that was in the account at the time she
13 withdrew $2 million to pay for Martin's bail.
14 And I think, you know, with respect to the law relating
15 to marital interests, I think it's pretty clear that under Hawaii
16 law, at least, marriages are looked at like -- well, viewed as a
17 partnership. And absent some agreement to the contrary, it's --
18 when parties contribute equally, whether it's by resources,
19 money, time, or other contributions, that it's typically viewed
20 50/50.
21 And so, we would submit that under 2044, it wouldn't
22 apply to the funds that Ms. Lam has in order to (indiscernible).
23 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Miyoshi. I'll
24 certainly hear from you, Mr. Nolan. Here's what I think I should
25 do, though, is one, unseal ECF 14, because we're all fighting
11
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 11 of 17 PageID.2226
1 over it, and I think -- is there any objection to me unsealing?
2 That's the affidavit of -- by owner of cash bail. Mr. Bakke,
3 your client signed it.
4 MR. BAKKE: No objection, Your Honor.
5 THE COURT: Okay. And Mr. Nolan, no objection?
6 MR. NOLAN: No objection.
7 THE COURT: Okay. So we will unseal the affidavit by
8 owner of cash bail. That's ECF 14. So then everybody has access
9 to it, and we can talk about it.
10 MR. NOLAN: So my colleague is just noticing that
11 before the Court unseals it, there's a Social Security number on
12 there that should be redacted.
13 THE COURT: All right.
14 MR. NOLAN: At least the first five digits.
15 THE COURT: All right. Thank you very much. So we'll
16 figure that out. We will redact -- we know who we're talking
17 about. We'll redact the whole Social Security number.
18 MR. NOLAN: Sure. Yeah.
19 THE COURT: We'll black it out. Anything else on that,
20 Mr. Bakke, that you'd like me to --
21 MR. BAKKE: No, Your Honor.
22 THE COURT: Occupation, driver's license number, date
23 of birth.
24 MR. BAKKE: I mean, whatever the personal identifiers,
25 I think, are supposed to be redacted. Sorry, I didn't look that
12
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 12 of 17 PageID.2227
1 closely at that information.
2 THE COURT: Yeah. Okay. Well, redact the Social
3 Security number, the date of birth, and the ID number, I'm
4 assuming is the driver's license number. So we'll redact that as
5 well. Let me take a closer look, if there's anything else that
6 we should redact.
7 MR. NOLAN: Well, Your Honor probably ought to redact
8 the street number on his residential address on the top line.
9 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. And the flip side is a
10 receipt. I don't think there's anything there that is of
11 concern. Mr. Nolan, when you're done, can you hand it over to
12 Mr. Bake again?
13 MR. NOLAN: Oh --
14 MR. BAKKE: Yeah, sorry. I don't have it in front of
15 me. Yeah, yeah, sorry. That's why I was going to --
16 THE COURT: Somehow I've ended up with two copies, and
17 you guys are sharing.
18 MR. BAKKE: I was going to say, oh, you can just keep
19 it under seal and make us a copy.
20 MR. NOLAN: And you have access to all the copies?
21 MR. BAKKE: Yeah, that's just the receipt.
22 THE COURT: Okay. So we'll unseal it with those
23 redactions. And then I think I should give the Government a
24 chance to file a further brief on this, if it would like. If it
25 doesn't -- I haven't read Mr. Miyoshi's brief. Like I said, I
13
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 13 of 17 PageID.2228
1 skimmed the factual recitation. I know what I think Hawaii law
2 would be on, like, a shared account between spouses, but I don't
3 know that at all. I tend to start where you ended, Mr. Nolan,
4 that either spouse can take out whatever they want from it. But
5 I don't know if I'm right about that.
6 So if you want a chance to brief it, I'll give it to
7 you. If you don't -- well, I need to do some reading before I
8 rule anyway now.
9 MR. NOLAN: Well, since the Court's going to look at
10 it, certainly we'll brief it. But I will say, somehow counsel
11 has bootstrapped this into 1.5 million. He said there's 3
12 million in the account. Two million came out. She's entitled to
13 half of what was in there. So she owns 1.5. And somehow now he
14 wants 1.5 of the 2 that's deposited with the Court.
15 I think, at best, and I think based on his pleading
16 here, his motion, the Court could rule today that 1.5 million
17 ought to be turned over and that then the parties can brief and
18 contest the remaining 500,000. That would be based on his
19 numbers, with her being entitled to 1.5 of the three.
20 THE COURT: Right.
21 MR. NOLAN: She would be --
22 THE COURT: The money is not going anywhere, right. So
23 I would rather just -- I don't think there's any exigency, Mr.
24 Nolan.
25 MR. NOLAN: So the money doesn't go anywhere until he
14
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 14 of 17 PageID.2229
1 reports --
2 THE COURT: Right.
3 MR. NOLAN: -- on March --
4 MR. BAKKE: 25th.
5 MR. NOLAN: -- 25th.
6 THE COURT: Okay.
7 MR. NOLAN: Yes. Or unless he turns himself in
8 earlier.
9 THE COURT: Sure. So how much -- one week, two weeks?
10 What would you guys like to --
11 MR. NOLAN: Two weeks, please.
12 THE COURT: Okay. Two weeks is fine.
13 MR. NOLAN: Thank you.
14 THE COURT: The 27th, February 27th.
15 MR. NOLAN: That works. Thank you.
16 THE COURT: Okay.
17 MR. BAKKE: That's a Thursday, right, Your Honor?
18 THE COURT: That's a Thursday.
19 MR. BAKKE: A Thursday.
20 THE COURT: Just the filing then, the filing by the
21 Thursday. And then I'll take a look at it and decide whether I
22 want another hearing or whether I could just issue something.
23 MR. NOLAN: Okay. Thank you.
24 THE COURT: And so, Mr. Bakke, if you would like to
25 file -- since I'm giving them another shot, you can review what
15
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 15 of 17 PageID.2230
1 Mr. Miyoshi's filed, and if you would like to supplement, you
2 can't, too, on the 27th.
3 MR. BAKKE: Yes, Your Honor. I'm a little confused.
4 Is Mr. Miyoshi coming into the case or -- because --
5 THE COURT: Why don't you file a motion to intervene?
6 I'm not sure logistically, how to handle this. I'm just trying
7 to get this issue right.
8 MR. BAKKE: I can't -- I can't represent Mr. Kao --
9 THE COURT: Right. Against --
10 MR. BAKKE: -- and Mrs. Kao against each other.
11 THE COURT: Right. Understood. Okay. So if you don't
12 want to file anything, you don't have to.
13 MR. BAKKE: Yeah, I --
14 THE COURT: I would like to file what Mr. Miyoshi
15 handed us in the case, but I was not thinking -- I was completely
16 glossing over those logistics.
17 MR. MIYOSHI: And, Your Honor, I did prepare a notice
18 of appearance for the limited purpose of this hearing. I don't
19 know if the Court could accept it or that it would be for me to
20 seek. I did look at the rules. I didn't really find anything
21 that would allow me to, from a rule standpoint, intervene into a
22 criminal matter.
23 THE COURT: Right. And that may be right. So.
24 MR. MIYOSHI: Looking at that, but I certainly -- the
25 Court could allow a special appearance just for purposes of this
16
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 16 of 17 PageID.2231
1 motion.
2 THE COURT: Yeah, I will for purposes of this motion
3 only. And I believe, based on the arguments you're making, your
4 client has standing on this issue because she's asserting these
5 are her assets. So I will allow it for that. And we'll try to
6 figure out how to get you formally in the case for limited
7 purposes of this motion.
8 MR. MIYOSHI: Is it possible to submit it to the Court?
9 THE COURT: Yeah. I'll leave them with you. Okay. So
10 we will do what we can to get those filed. We're going to unseal
11 as redacted ECF 14 and the Government and Mr. Kao, if he would
12 like, I don't know that there's anything different he would want
13 to say, and I'm not trying to create a conflict, but if he would
14 like to file anything else on the 27th, he may.
15 MR. BAKKE: Thank you.
16 THE COURT: And then I will read everything and decide
17 whether we need to get together or whether I can just issue an
18 order. Anything further from anybody?
19 MR. NOLAN: No. Thank you, Your Honor.
20 THE COURT: Okay.
21 MR. BAKKE: No, Your Honor.
22 THE COURT: Thanks. We'll be in recess.
23 THE CLERK: All rise. Court stands in recess.
24 (Proceedings concluded at 4:08 p.m.)
25
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK Document 184 Filed 07/08/25 Page 17 of 17 PageID.2232 17
CERTIFICATE
I, Jessica B. Cahill, court approved transcriber, do hereby
certify that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §753, the foregoing is a
complete, true, and correct transcript from the official
electronic sound recording of the proceedings in the above-
entitled matter and that the transcript page format is in
conformance with the regulations of the Judicial Conference of
the United States.
Dated: June 28, 2025
Jessica B. Cahill, CER/CET-708
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.hid.154418.184.0.pdf
- Size
- 117,314 bytes
- SHA-256
- 2e35e8a02cb21e643f0854014476f3c8b2d13b1f9ce88a78f8b929e8280e8e7e
- Original
- PACER (login required)