USA v. Abari

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v. 	MEMORANDUM OF LAW & ORDER
Criminal File No. 19-00103 (1) (MJD)
ANTHONY AKEMU ABARI,
Defendant.
Katharine T. Buzicky, Assistant United States Attorney, Counsel for Plaintiff.
Anthony Akemu Abari, pro se.
I. 	INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Anthony Akemu Abari’s Pro
Se Motion for a New Trial. (Doc. 709.)
II. 	BACKGROUND
The background of this case is well-known to the Court. In 2019, Abari
and co-defendants Kevin Green and Relondo Hall were charged in this District
with several drug and firearm offenses. Hall pleaded guilty, cooperated with the
government, and testified at the trial of Abari and Green. On January 21, 2022,
the jury convicted Abari of three of the four counts against him. The Eighth
Circuit affirmed his conviction. Abari then filed a motion to vacate his sentence
CASE 0:19-cr-00103-MJD-ECW Doc. 737 Filed 04/20/26 Page 1 of 4

2
under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which this Court denied. The Court also denied a
certificate of appealability. The Eighth Circuit, likewise, denied Abari’s
application for a certificate of appealability. (Doc. 731.) Abari now seeks a new
trial, raising several of the issues the Court has already decided, including
alleged governmental misconduct and claims about attorney performance,
including issues with jury instructions he states should have been given. Abari
does not claim newly-discovered evidence justifies a new trial.
III. 	DISCUSSION
Abari filed his motion for a new trial on December 11, 2025. Rule 33 of the
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure permits a court to “vacate any judgment
and grant a new trial if the interest of justice so requires.” However, “[a]ny
motion for a new trial grounded on any reason other than newly discovered
evidence must be filed within 14 days after the verdict or finding of guilty.” Fed.
R. Crim. P. 33(b)(2). A motion based on newly discovered evidence “must be
filed within 3 years after the verdict or a finding of guilty.” Id. (b)(1).
Late-filing is allowed only in rare instances of “excusable neglect,” which
include the following: “the danger of prejudice to the nonmoving party, the
length of the delay and its potential impact on the judicial proceedings, the
CASE 0:19-cr-00103-MJD-ECW Doc. 737 Filed 04/20/26 Page 2 of 4

3
reason for the delay, including whether it was within the reasonable control of
the movant; and whether the movant acted in good faith.” Pioneer Inv. Servs.
Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P’ship, 507 U.S. 380, 395 (1993); Fed. R. Crim. P.
45(b)(1)(B); Lennartson v. Cristofono, No. 21-CV-0013 (PJS), 2021 WL 1749916, at
*2 (D. Minn. Mar. 30, 2021) (same), aff’d, No. 21-1979, 2022 WL 245527 (8th Cir.
Jan. 27, 2022).
Abari’s motion is untimely. The jury rendered its verdict on January 21,
2022. (Doc. 459.) Therefore, under Rule 33(b)(2), Abari had 14 days to seek a
new trial, or three years to seek a new trial based on newly discovered evidence
under Rule 33(b)(1). His motion, filed on December 11, 2025, is approximately 47
months after the deadline in Rule 33(b)(2), and about eleven months after the
deadline in Rule 33(b)(1). Moreover, Abari does not claim excusable neglect
caused his late filing.
Finally, the motion must be denied on the merits because the issues raised
have already been decided by the Court during the trial or in Abari’s § 2255
motion, all of which were affirmed by the Eighth Circuit. In short, the interests
of justice do not require that the Court grant Abari’s motion. See Fed. R. Crim. P.
33(a).
CASE 0:19-cr-00103-MJD-ECW Doc. 737 Filed 04/20/26 Page 3 of 4

4
Accordingly, based upon the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Anthony Akemu Abari’s Pro Se Motion for
a New Trial [Doc. 709] is DISMISSED AS TIME BARRED.
Dated: 	April 20, 2026 	s/Michael J. Davis
Michael J. Davis
United States District Court
CASE 0:19-cr-00103-MJD-ECW Doc. 737 Filed 04/20/26 Page 4 of 4