By Andrew Goudsward
WASHINGTON, Dec 2 (Reuters) – A key figure in the Trump administration’s now-dismissed criminal case against former FBI Director James Comey has asked a federal judge to bar prosecutors from continuing to use crucial evidence, according to court documents made public on Tuesday.
The material at issue in the lawsuit from Daniel Richman, a law professor and former attorney to Comey, would likely be central to any effort by prosecutors to revive the case against Comey.
Reuters reported on Monday the Justice Department is weighing whether to seek a new indictment as soon as this week after a federal judge tossed out charges against Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, both perceived adversaries of President Donald Trump. The judge found the prosecutor leading the cases, Lindsey Halligan, was unlawfully appointed.
Richman sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, challenging prosecutors’ use of material the FBI seized from his electronic devices in a separate investigation in 2019 and 2020, alleging it violated his protection against unreasonable searches and seizures under the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment.
HURDLE AS ADMINISTRATION MULLS NEW CASE
Richman’s lawsuit is one of several legal hurdles prosecutors could face in a renewed indictment against Comey, who pleaded not guilty to the initial charges.
A Justice Department spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Prosecutors relied on the Richman material to charge Comey with making false statements and obstructing Congress for allegedly lying when he told a Senate committee in 2020 that he stood behind prior testimony that he had not authorized FBI officials to serve as anonymous sources in news reports.
The indictment alleged that Richman, who had served at one point as a special FBI employee, communicated with reporters about a probe involving Trump’s 2016 election rival, Democrat Hillary Clinton.
JUDGE FOUND SERIOUS ERRORS
U.S. Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick last month found that prosecutors may have made serious errors in handling material seized from Richman as part of the earlier probe into potential disclosure of classified information. Neither Comey nor Richman was charged in that investigation.
Prosecutors investigating Comey reexamined that material this year as part of a separate investigation into Comey without obtaining a new warrant, Fitzpatrick found. Prosecutors challenged Fitzpatrick’s ruling before the case was dismissed on other grounds.
Richman’s lawsuit seeks a court order directing prosecutors to delete or return the seized material and barring any further use of evidence improperly seized or retained.
(Reporting by Andrew Goudsward; editing by Scott Malone and Rod Nickel)
