Key facts
- Federal prosecutors proposed a late October or November 2026 start for the retrial of Tornado Cash co-founder Roman Storm.
- Storm faces potential retrial on charges of conspiracy to commit money laundering and conspiracy to violate sanctions.
- Alex Mashinsky, former Celsius CEO, is awaiting a response to his motion to vacate his 12-year sentence.
- A US soldier, Gannon Ken Van Dyke, is scheduled for a December 2026 trial for alleged insider trading on Polymarket.
- Van Dyke allegedly profited over $400,000 from a contract related to the capture of Venezuela President Nicolás Maduro.
Federal prosecutors have proposed a late 2026 timeline for the potential retrial of Tornado Cash co-founder Roman Storm, who was found guilty on one of three charges in 2025 but had a jury deadlock on the others. A filing from the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York suggests a pretrial conference in October 2026, with a trial potentially starting in late October or November of that year. This timeline is contingent on the court's decision regarding Storm's motion for acquittal on the remaining charges.
Storm's case is significant for the crypto industry due to its implications for developer liability for code. If a retrial proceeds, he will again face charges of conspiracy to commit money laundering and conspiracy to violate sanctions.
In a separate case, Judge John Koeltl has given prosecutors until mid-August to respond to a motion filed by former Celsius CEO Alex Mashinsky to vacate his 12-year sentence. Mashinsky, who is representing himself, reported to federal prison in May 2025 after being sentenced. He was indicted in 2023 on fraud and market manipulation charges, with Celsius filing for bankruptcy in 2022.
Additionally, a US soldier, Gannon Ken Van Dyke, is looking at a December 2026 trial for allegedly making over $400,000 on a Polymarket event contract related to the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Van Dyke was arrested in April and has pleaded not guilty to all charges. This case raises concerns among lawmakers about elected officials potentially betting on events with nonpublic information.