2015 \u2013 present<\/p>\n
Federal Judicial Service:<\/strong><\/p>\n Education:<\/strong><\/p>\n Professional Career:<\/strong><\/p>\n Noteworthy Cases:<\/strong><\/p>\n United States v. Iverson<\/em>, No. 1:14-CR-00197:<\/p>\n In July 2016, Elijah Iverson was convicted of five drug and firearm offenses after a three\u2011day trial.\u00a0 Two days earlier, Judge Vilardo had granted Iverson\u2019s motion under Batson v. Kentucky<\/em>, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), to restore two prospective jurors of color for whom the government had exercised peremptory challenges.\u00a0 Before the jury issued its verdict, the government moved to vacate the Batson <\/em>finding.\u00a0 Judge Vilardo issued an opinion affirming his Batson <\/em>ruling as to one of the jurors (No. 6) and vacating it as to the other (No. 16).\u00a0 Judge Vilardo first found that the issue was not moot because it was likely to recur.\u00a0 He then explained that with respect to Juror No. 6, the prosecution\u2019s proffered race\u2011neutral reason \u2013 that the juror lacked \u201clife experience\u201d \u2013 did not hold up under scrutiny.\u00a0 More specifically, there were at least three white jurors who lacked \u201clife experience\u201d in similar ways to Juror No. 6 but were not struck.\u00a0 Judge Vilardo explained that whether it was conscious or not, the prosecutors had let race play a substantial role in the exercise of a preemptory challenge for Juror No. 6 and that the Court had an obligation to closely look at the underlying motivation behind the challenge.<\/p>\n United States v. Iverson<\/em>, 2016 WL 6143195 (W.D.N.Y. 2016), aff\u2019d<\/em>, 897 F.3d 450 (2d Cir. 2018) <\/p>\n Seneca Nation v. Cuomo, et al.<\/em>, No. 1:18-CV-00429:<\/p>\n Seneca Nation sued the New York State Thruway Authority regarding a toll road that the Nation said stemmed from an illegal easement over its land.\u00a0 The Nation sought to force the Thruway Authority to obtain a valid easement, or, in the alternative, to be enjoined from collecting tolls for the portion of the thruway that passes through the Nation\u2019s land.\u00a0 Analyzing complex issues of collateral estoppel and the application of the Eleventh Amendment under Ex Parte Young<\/em>, Judge Vilardo denied the defendants\u2019 motion to dismiss.\u00a0 Recognizing the weight and difficulty of these two issues, however, Judge Vilardo certified them for interlocutory appeal to the Second Circuit.\u00a0 The Second Circuit ultimately affirmed Judge Vilardo\u2019s decision.<\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\nhttps:\/\/casetext.com\/case\/united-states-v-iverson-10<\/a><\/p>\n
\n