DOJ Cites Bitcoin Fog Verdict in Fight Against Roman Storm’s Acquittal Bid
Federal prosecutors are citing a recent appeals court decision involving the cryptocurrency mixer Bitcoin Fog as part of their opposition to Roman Storm’s motion for acquittal. By referencing the affirmed conviction of Roman Sterlingov, Bitcoin Fog’s operator, they argue that Tornado Cash activity conducted in Manhattan sufficiently establishes venue in the Southern District of New York and justifies the charges against Storm.
Bitcoin Fog Appeals Court Ruling and Its Implications
On September 25, an appeals court in the D.C. Circuit affirmed the convictions and sentence of Roman Sterlingov, the operator of the cryptocurrency mixer Bitcoin Fog. The court held that venue in Washington, D.C. was proper for all four counts, relying on evidence that an undercover agent conducted Bitcoin Fog transactions from his D.C. office for the money-laundering charges, and that Bitcoin Fog served customers in the district for the unlicensed money-transmission counts.
Connection of Bitcoin Fog Ruling to Roman Storm’s Case
Prosecutors argue that the Bitcoin Fog ruling directly supports their position in Storm’s case, maintaining that Tornado Cash activity in Manhattan—specifically the testimony of Shakeeb Ahmed who used Tornado Cash from his apartment—sufficiently establishes venue in the Southern District of New York for the money-laundering and unlicensed money-transmission conspiracy charges against Storm.
Arguments Surrounding Storm's Acquittal Motion
Judge Katherine Polk Failla heard arguments on Storm’s motion for acquittal in April 2026, but has not yet ruled. Storm was convicted in August 2025 for conspiring to operate an unlicensed money-transmitting business, while the jury deadlocked on money-laundering and sanctions conspiracy charges. A retrial on those charges is scheduled for April 26, 2027, if they remain active.
Disputed Evidence and Venue Issues
In his 2025 acquittal motion, Storm contended that Ahmed’s use of Tornado Cash from his Manhattan apartment was insufficient to establish venue because those transactions did not further the alleged conspiracy. Prosecutors countered by emphasizing that even short-lived deposits aid a mixer by enlarging the transaction pool used to obscure funds, and argued that this reasoning applies to Ahmed’s Tornado Cash activity, supporting the government’s conspiracy claims.
Roman Storm’s Response and Regulatory Context
Storm criticized the Department of Justice’s continued pursuit on social media, stating the DOJ is using all available means against him. Additionally, he referenced a concurrent Treasury Department announcement withdrawing a proposed cryptocurrency mixer rule, highlighting conflicting government approaches to crypto privacy tools.
Why it matters
The recent appeals court decision in the Bitcoin Fog case serves as a critical legal precedent in the high-profile prosecution of Tornado Cash developer Roman Storm. The affirmed jurisdiction and evidentiary standards underpin prosecutors’ argument for venue and charges in New York, potentially impacting the case’s outcome. This reflects intensifying judicial and regulatory scrutiny facing cryptocurrency mixers—controversial tools often linked to money laundering yet operating in legal gray areas. The ongoing struggle to balance technological privacy with law enforcement objectives continues to shape how courts and regulators treat crypto privacy services.
Prepared from the source material with AI-assisted editing and checked against the supplied facts.
Open original source ↗