The convicted former president of Starkey Laboratories and a former business associate filed a flurry of post-trial motions last week asking for a new trial in U.S. District Court in Minneapolis.
Fired Starkey President Jerry Ruzicka and a former Starkey supplier, W. Jeff Taylor, were convicted of fraud by a jury on March 8 for helping to steal millions of dollars from Starkey, the largest hearing aid manufacturer in America.
The jury found Ruzicka guilty on eight of 25 federal charges for his role in stealing restricted stock from Starkey's owner, benefiting from sham companies, tax evasion and stealing his company car. The jury found co-defendant Taylor, the former president of Sonion U.S. — guilty on three of 16 charges against him, including wire and mail fraud, for his role in setting up sham companies and splitting lucrative consulting fees with Ruzicka.
Both Ruzicka and Taylor had until last Thursday to file post-trial motions before Judge John Tunheim. The judge has not set sentencing dates for either defendant. And the two could still formally appeal their case, which is a different procedure than those involving the documents filed last week.
In his request last week, Ruzicka asked for a new trial based on a host of reasons, including alleged prosecutorial misconduct and the government's alleged violation of perjury rules in the handling of testimony by Starkey's owner, Bill Austin.
Ruzicka also said he deserved a new trial because prosecutors erroneously expanded the government's criminal indictment by accusing Ruzicka at the last minute of abusing his authority and autonomy and of fraud by concealment. Based on jurors' questions given to the judge before issuing the verdict, Ruzicka's motion said that their questions "demonstrate the likelihood that a conviction was based on an uncharged scheme."
Tim Rank, deputy criminal chief of the U.S. Attorney's Office's fraud and public corruption section, said in a statement that the government will soon submit a written response opposing the defendants' motions.
"Oftentimes, such post-trial motions seek to relitigate issues already decided by the court at trial," he said. "The government is confident that Judge Tunheim afforded the defendants in this case a fair trial."