Is Andy Bowdoin Renewing His Efforts To Have Federal Judge Removed From Case? Accused Ponzi Swindler Faces New Filing Deadline To Argue For Case Transfer

Andy Bowdoin

Accused Ponzi swindler Andy Bowdoin of Florida-based AdSurfDaily has been granted an extra two weeks to argue that the criminal case against him should be transferred from U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Through his attorneys, Bowdoin informed U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer on Jan. 3 that he intends to file a Rule 21 motion to transfer his trial to another federal court. Under Rule 21, a defendant can argue that he cannot receive a fair and impartial trial in a specific district. Meanwhile, a defendant can argue that the trial should be moved for the convenience of the parties and witnesses.

It was not immediately clear if prosecutors would oppose the motion. Bowdoin initially was ordered by a federal magistrate judge to file his motion within two weeks of his Dec. 17 arraignment in Washington. Collyer now has granted Bowdoin’s request for an extension to file. The new deadline is Jan. 18.

In December 2009, Bowdoin sought to have Collyer removed from the civil-forfeiture case in which the U.S. Secret Service seized tens of millions of dollars from his personal bank accounts. Collyer refused to step down. In January 2010, she decreed the money forfeited to the U.S. government, which has established a process through which ASD victims can file a claim for a share of the seized proceeds.

In an affidavit in support of his 2009 disqualification motion, Bowdoin claimed Collyer had a “deep seated animosity” toward him and that the judge “has a personal bias and prejudice” against him.

Ironically, Bowdoin’s motion to disqualify Collyer in the civil case was docketed on Dec. 17, 2009. Exactly one year to the day later — on Dec. 17, 2010 — Bowdoin made his first appearance in the criminal case in the District of Columbia. Federal agents arrested Bowdoin in Florida on Dec. 1, 2010, after an indictment from a grand jury that began meeting in May 2009 was unsealed.

Collyer did not preside over Bowdoin’s initial appearance in Washington, but has been assigned the criminal case. She issued her first ruling yesterday: a minute order that granted Bowdoin’s request for the two-week extension to file his Rule 21 motion.

ASD member Curtis Richmond, who emerged as a figure in the civil litigation after filing pro se pleadings that accused Collyer and Chief U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth of operating a “Kangaroo Court,” also sought unsuccessfully to have Collyer removed from the case in 2009.

Richmond has been linked to a sham Utah “Indian” tribe that once sought unsuccessfully to have a federal judge removed from a different case on the eve of trial by claiming the judge owed Richmond $30 million.

About the Author

6 Responses to “Is Andy Bowdoin Renewing His Efforts To Have Federal Judge Removed From Case? Accused Ponzi Swindler Faces New Filing Deadline To Argue For Case Transfer”

  1. Patrick, it would not be so far fetched for one to conclude that this Rule 21(b) motion will be met with the same disfavor as his previous motions to get Judge Collyer removed. When she signed the Minute Order, I’d guess she was smiling.

      (Quote)

  2. …..virtually anyone can see that it is a near-certainty that Mr. Bowdoin will spend his last days behind bars — Bowdoin knows it too. Further, he has claimed that his wife is seriously ill. His actions thus far will not allow him to escape this fate, but everything he has done has been to delay the inevitable. He knows it will happen, it’s obvious that at least some members of his family would prefer to see him behind bars, and it’s likely his cheerleaders (that’s you Fat Barb) have long since left the building. Bowdoin has yet (to my knowledge) filed ANY of his motions in a timely fashion. If I wanted to avoid jail as long as possible, that’s what I’d do too……

      (Quote)

  3. It’s right about now that even the most strident critics of “naysayers” are beginning to realize that when the naysayers used the phrase “you ain’t seen nuttin’ yet” they were, in fact, understating what was about to take place.

      (Quote)

  4. On the merits, Andy has a good case here for removal to I assume Northern District of Florida. I wouldn’t be surprised to see him win this one, for what little good it will do. I’m curious, though if this would mean the prosecutor would change to the US Attorney in Florida or if the DC team would have to move their case to Florida. I’ll find out.

    Not defending Andy in any way, but there is a very good argument that this case should be heard in Florida. The bad news is ripping off tens of millions of dollars is illegal there, too.

      (Quote)

  5. I cant see why. Washington DC was not too far away when Bowdoin requested an Evidential Hearing there. Has it moved?

      (Quote)

Leave a Reply