Communications “breakdown” between Rodrigues and lawyer
Unhappy with how things are progressing in his visa fraud case, Sanderely Rodrigues has fired the law firm representing him.
Specifics are as of yet unclear, but the situation appears to have deteriorated to the point where “a complete breakdown of communication” was cited the reason behind the decision.
In a “Motion To Withdraw As Counsel” filed on the 7th of July, Rodrigues’ former lawyer writes
As reason for this request counsel states that there has been a complete breakdown of communication between counsel and the defendant. The defendant is facing Visa Fraud.
Counsel for the Defendant further states that it is in the best interest of the defendant that new counsel be appointed to represent him in this matter as he has been held for approximately 60 days and all assets have been seized by the Security Exchange Commission.
An affidavit accompanying the motion provides a little more insight, with a timeline revealing
on or about June 30, 2015 (Rodrigues) terminated Liberty Law Group via email sent by the Camilla De Vasconcelos, the wife of (Rodrigues) and payments from (Rodrigues) to the law firm have been returned as insufficient funds.
I’m not sure whether that means the funds Rodrigues (right) sent to the law firm were insufficient and they returned them, or whether the Law Firm tried to deposit a check or some such and it was returned insufficient funds.
In any event,
On or about July 2, 2015 I met with (Rodrigues) at Wyatt Detention Center to discuss the termination. (Rodrigues) asked that I return in a couple days (sic) to discuss the matter further.
On July 7, 2015 I met with (Rodrigues) at Wyatt Detention Center in Central Falls, Rhode Island to discuss the termination.
(Rodrigues) stated that he preferred a new counsel, that he was not happy with my representation, and that he could no longer pay for counsel unless released.
On the second of July the SEC busted DFRF Enterprises, a $16 million dollar Ponzi scheme.
In their complaint, the SEC revealed that DFRF Enterprises transferred over $310,000 to Rodrigues for reasons unknown.
Whether or not these funds have been frozen as part of the injunction granted against DFRF in the SEC’s case is unclear. If so, it would certainly explain why Rodrigues was unable to pay his former counsel.
Rodrigues recently had his wife cough up $200,000 for bond in the visa case, only to then be re-arrested on a Brazilian warrant. Where Rodrigues’ wife sourced $200,000 from is unclear.
Also curious is the statement he can’t pay them unless he was released. Was Rodrigues demanding the firm get him out of custody or alluding to a stash of funds in a secret hidey-hole that only he personally can access?
The answers to those questions for now go unanswered, with Rodrigues former lawyer concluding:
There has been a breakdown of communication between counsel and the defendant that has made it impossible for counsel to properly represent the defendant.
It is in the best interest of the defendant that new counsel be appointed to represent him.
A Judge has yet to sign off on the motion, stay tuned…
Footnote: Our thanks to Don@ASDUpdates for providing a copy of Joseph Hennessey’s “Motion To Withdraw As Counsel And Appoint Counsel”.