ST. CROIX — A federal judge will determine whether former official Darin Richardson will be allowed to remain free pending appeal of his conviction on federal and local corruption charges, with Richardson due to surrender to federal custody on Tuesday.
Richardson, the former chief operating officer of the Virgin Islands Housing Finance Authority who was sentenced last month to a combined three years in prison, is asking the District Court to allow him to remain free while he appeals his conviction.
Attorney Darren John-Baptiste, who represents Richardson, filed the renewed motion for release pending appeal today, just two business days before his client is scheduled to walk into federal custody.
In response, District Judge Mark Kearney issued an order the same day requiring the government to file its response by 3 p.m. on Monday. The judge also reminded Richardson of the 14-day appeal period.
Richardson was sentenced on March 26 to a combined three years in prison after a jury found him guilty on all five counts — criminal conflict of interest under Virgin Islands law and four federal counts, including making a material false statement to a federal agent, bank fraud, making a false statement on a loan or credit application, and money laundering.
READ MORE: Darin Richardson found guilty on all five counts including fraud after jury deliberates for one day
Kearney sentenced Richardson to six months on the federal fraud and money laundering counts and two and a half years on the conflict-of-interest count, with the sentences ordered to run consecutively.
At the conclusion of the sentencing hearing, John-Baptiste moved the court orally to allow Richardson to remain free on bond pending appeal. Kearney denied the motion from the bench, prompting the written renewed motion now before the court.
Under federal law, a defendant seeking release pending appeal must show they are not a flight risk, that the appeal is not filed for delay, and that it raises a substantial question likely to result in a reversal, new trial, or reduced sentence. Richardson’s attorney argues his client meets all three.
On the question of danger and flight risk, the defense points to Richardson’s profile under federal sentencing guidelines. He is classified as a Zone A offender — the lowest possible category — with an offense level of six and no prior arrests. His attorney also notes that Richardson remained in full compliance with all release conditions while the case was pending, and that numerous community members submitted character letters on his behalf attesting to his strong ties to the Virgin Islands community.
The heart of Richardson’s appeal centers on several evidentiary rulings the court made during trial that his attorney contends were improper. Central to the government’s case was the testimony of Kimberly McCollum and various summary exhibits related to Island Services Group, a Florida-based company McCollum co-owns with Morris Anselmi that is connected to the charges against Richardson.
While serving as VIHFA’s chief operating officer, Richardson was found guilty of steering a contract to Island Services Group. The agreement involved the storage, tracking, and management of lumber the Federal Emergency Management Agency provided for rebuilding homes following the 2017 hurricanes. Davidson and Sasha Charlemagne are linked to that same contract, which increased multiple times to $4.4 million.
Davidson Charlemagne, owner of D&S Trucking, allegedly approached Island Services Group and encouraged it to submit the successful bid, with his company positioned as a subcontractor expected to receive a significant share of the proceeds. Under that setup, D&S Trucking performed work under the ISG contract, which prosecutors allege included fraudulent billing and misuse of federal disaster recovery funds. The Charlemagnes are set to go to trial on July 17.
In his motion, John-Baptiste specifically challenges the admission of various summary exhibits and McCollum’s testimony. The defense objected to this evidence at trial on the grounds of relevance, but the court overruled those objections and allowed the evidence in.
According to the motion, that evidence was pivotal to the government’s ability to prove Count 14 — the criminal conflict of interest charge under local law. That count required the government to show that Richardson knowingly held a financial or other interest, direct or indirect, in a transaction that substantially conflicted with the proper discharge of his official duties in the public interest. The defense argues that without the disputed testimony and exhibits, the government would have been unable to meet that burden of proof.
The motion notes that a successful challenge to Count 14 on appeal would dramatically change Richardson’s sentencing exposure. Without a conviction on that count, his total federal sentence would stand at just six months — the sentence imposed on the remaining counts — rather than the three-year combined sentence he currently faces.
Richardson’s appeal also raises a separate issue involving notes taken by a federal agent during the government’s investigation. Special Agent Jamila Davis, formerly of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, interviewed Richardson during the investigation and took notes of that interview. On the eve of trial, the government acknowledged that the notes existed but were no longer available. Evidence introduced during the trial indicated the file had been transferred to other agents and ultimately could not be located.
Those notes are directly relevant to Count 15 — the charge that Richardson made a materially false statement to Davis when he told her he had recused himself from a particular matter. The defense argues that the disappearance of those notes and their unavailability at trial raises a substantial question that warrants appellate review.
The government, represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney Cherrisse Amaro, does not oppose the court reducing its prior bench ruling to a formal written order, according to the motion. The government, however, opposes Richardson’s request to remain free on bond during the appeal.
If the court grants the motion, Richardson would be allowed to remain in the community under his existing bond conditions while his appeal moves forward. If the motion is denied, or if the court does not act in time, Richardson would be required to report to federal custody on Tuesday to begin serving his three-year sentence.
