Over the last couple of months, a former FTX CEO, Sam Bankman-Fried’s legal nightmare has taken another turn as he filed an appeal with Judge Lewis Kaplan from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. This news comes after he was sentenced to an almost 25-year prison sentence on March 28.

Judge Kaplan Condemns Bankman-Fried’s Actions in Fraud Case

As court documents reveal, Bankman-Fried’s appeal covers both the conviction and the harshness of the sentence itself. On the other hand, legal experts did expect that to happen after the seven counts the CEO had been found guilty. Judge Kaplan didn’t hold back when he handed down the sentence. He stated categorically that he thought Bankman-Fried had committed perjury and had deliberately engaged in wrongdoing.

While Bankman-Fried admitted he had made “self-centered” decisions, he claimed his clients suffered losses due to an FTX-wide liquidity crisis initiated by mismanagement. The former executive had been on trial since last November when the New York jury found him guilty of defrauding FTX’s customers, lenders and investors on all counts.

Prosecutors did not mind sharing that the scheme was potentially the biggest fraud in the last years. Nevertheless, Bankman-Fried’s family continued advocating he had been feeling regret. They also expressed a great deal of genuine concern for his safety in the prison.

Legal Community Watches Bankman-Fried Case for Industry Impact

Knowing what a risk his wealth and social status could represent, Judge Kaplan suggested he should serve his sentence at a medium- or low-level-security facility located near the California Bay Area. However, Bankman-Fried may still end up with the Brooklyn located Metropolitan Detention Center while his appeal and trial proceedings are underway.

This case will be followed closely and with high levels of attention, this case of Bankman-Fried may become a cornerstone for future legal interpretations in this unpredictable and rapidly changing industry. And while the CEO himself remains in the legal system’s grasp; his possible verdict concerns not only him but all stakeholders, including investors, other major players in the industry, and state regulators.