About

Defense seeks suppression of Tricolor ex-CEO Daniel Chu's phone and device evidence, alleging FBI and FDIC agents' flawed review

Published
Score
22

Why it matters

Former Tricolor CEO Daniel Chu is asking Judge P. Kevin Castel in Manhattan federal court to suppress all evidence taken from his electronic devices. In an October 16 letter, defense attorney Matthew Schwartz argues that the review of electronically stored information broke the terms of the warrants and reflects bad faith. The motion comes after a three-day evidentiary hearing. The government maintains that a quality-control process was in place, but Schwartz says testimony from the review team, which included two FBI special agents and two FDIC Office of Inspector General agents, showed none existed.

Chu faces bank and wire fraud charges brought by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, the FBI and the FDIC. The indictment, returned in December 2025, alleges that from 2018 to 2025 Tricolor double-pledged auto-loan collateral and manipulated loan data to make delinquent accounts appear current. The Justice Department later added a charge under the Continuing Financial Crimes Enterprise statute, the rarely used "financial kingpin" law. The defense calls that theory novel and ill-defined. Co-defendant David Goodgame, a former COO, faces conspiracy and bank fraud charges. Former CFO Jerome Kollar and finance executive Ameryn Seibold have pleaded guilty. The SEC separately charged Chu, Kollar and Seibold in August 2026 over the same scheme. Trial, originally set for October 19, 2026, has moved to January 25, 2027, according to reporting.

Castel has not ruled on the suppression motion. Details of the government's position beyond its earlier defense of the review process are not yet public. Any ruling could determine whether the government's digital evidence can be used at trial, and the hearing has put the FBI and FDIC review methods on the record. Attorneys following the case should watch for Castel's decision, the government's response to the October 16 letter, and any change to the January trial date.

Sources

mail Subscribe to Law And Technology email updates

Primary sources. No fluff. Straight to your inbox.

Also on LawSnap