Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors2Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches3Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsSam Bankman-Fried appealed his conviction, arguing that trial judge Lewis A. Kaplan’s rulings—including decisions about evidence, jury instructions, discovery and forfeiture—unduly constrained his defense. On June 12, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rejected his challenges and affirmed the district court judgment.
What happened in the appeal?
A jury found Bankman-Fried guilty of seven fraud and conspiracy counts connected to FTX and Alameda Research. He appealed the resulting judgment to the Second Circuit, which heard oral argument on November 4, 2025. Circuit Judges Barrington D. Parker, Eunice C. Lee and Maria Araujo Kahn decided the appeal; Parker authored the June 12, 2026 opinion.
The panel’s opening disposition was direct: “We AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.” That means the appellate court left the trial judgment in place. The opinion addresses Bankman-Fried’s challenges to the way the trial was conducted; it does not establish the outcome of any later Supreme Court proceeding.
What did Bankman-Fried challenge, and how did the panel rule?
The appeal raised several groups of issues. The panel rejected them all. The distinction matters: the arguments below were Bankman-Fried’s claims about the trial, while the rulings that follow are the Second Circuit’s conclusions.
#1 Best Overall
| Issue | Bankman-Fried’s argument | Second Circuit’s resolution |
|---|---|---|
| Trial evidence and advice of counsel | He argued that evidentiary rulings restricted his ability to present a defense involving lawyers’ participation in some company decisions. | The panel concluded the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting the advice-of-counsel evidence. It noted that Bankman-Fried had not presented a formal advice-of-counsel defense at trial and that, on several disputed matters, he had not told counsel that FTX customer funds were involved. |
| Investment value and customer-loss evidence | He challenged the trial court’s treatment of evidence concerning the eventual value of his investments and customer losses. | The panel rejected the challenge. |
| Jury instructions | He challenged instructions on fraudulent intent and related issues. | The panel rejected the challenge to the instructions. |
| Discovery | He challenged discovery decisions involving FTX debtors and counsel. | The panel rejected the discovery challenges. |
| Forfeiture | He challenged the forfeiture order. | The panel rejected the challenge. |
Why did the panel uphold the conviction?
The opinion assessed the challenges against the trial record and the standards governing appellate review. On the advice-of-counsel issue, for example, the panel focused on what Bankman-Fried had told lawyers about the involvement of customer funds and on the defense actually presented at trial. It concluded the district court’s evidentiary ruling was within its discretion.
More broadly, the panel characterized the trial evidence as powerful. It wrote: “The overwhelming evidence presented at trial proved that Bankman-Fried knowingly and intentionally committed large-scale fraud on FTX’s customers.” That is the court’s conclusion about the record, not a quotation of Bankman-Fried’s position.
Rank #2
What does this mean for readers following the FTX case?
The appeal did not result in a new trial or reversal: the Second Circuit affirmed the district court judgment. The ruling resolves the appellate challenges covered by this opinion, but it should not be treated as proof of the status or outcome of any separate later proceeding.
The opinion’s background describes FTX as handling around $10–$15 billion in daily customer trading in 2022. That is a historical case-background figure reported by the court, not a measure of current exchange activity.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Quick Recap
Sources
- Second Circuit opinion, June 12, 2026
- Supreme Court-hosted appendix associated with docket No. 26-349
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
