This guest post was authored by our colleague Jeremy A. Gunn, an associate in the firm’s Litigation Department.
In an unusual win for both the U.S. Department of Justice and corporate defendants, the D.C. Circuit last week reversed a district court’s refusal to pause the speedy-trial clock pursuant to a deferred prosecution agreement. United States v. Fokker Servs. B.V., — F.3d —, No. 15-3016, slip op. at 1 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 5, 2016). The district court’s action was the first time that any federal court had denied a motion to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act based on a deferred prosecution agreement being too lenient on corporate defendants. On appeal, the D.C. Circuit held that the Speedy Trial Act does not confer authority on a district court to withhold exclusion of time based upon a disagreement with the Department of Justice’s charging decisions.
In 2010, Fokker Services – a Dutch aerospace company that provides aircraft manufacturers with technical support and equipment – voluntarily notified the Government that it had potentially violated federal sanctions by engaging in illicit transactions with Iran, Sudan, and Burma. United States v. Fokker Servs. B.V., 79 F. Supp. 3d 160, 161 (D.D.C. 2015), vacated and remanded, No. 15-3016 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 5, 2016).
Fokker fully cooperated with the Government’s investigation for more than four years. As a result of that investigation, the Government negotiated a global settlement with Fokker that provided an 18-month deferred prosecution agreement (“DPA”). As part of the DPA, Fokker was required to pay $21 million in fines and accept responsibility for violating U.S. sanctions and export laws. In return, the Government agreed to dismiss its charges upon Fokker’s compliance. Continue reading