US prosecutors in Manhattan have officially requested a retrial for Roman Storm, the co-founder of the crypto mixer Tornado Cash. This move follows a trial last year where a jury failed to reach a unanimous verdict on two major charges.

The Legal Request

Manhattan US Attorney Jay Clayton submitted a letter to federal Judge Katherine Polk Failla on Monday, proposing a trial date between October 5 and October 12. The government estimates the retrial will span approximately three weeks.

While prosecutors expressed readiness to proceed as early as this spring, Storm’s defense team indicated they are unavailable until late 2026. The defense also argued that scheduling a new trial is premature, as a pending motion for acquittal regarding the money transmitting charge remains unresolved until April.

Background on the Charges

In August, a jury convicted Storm of conspiring to operate an unlicensed money transmitting business. However, the jury remained deadlocked on two other counts:

  • Conspiracy to commit money laundering
  • Conspiracy to violate sanctions

Storm has maintained his innocence, arguing that he did not intend to facilitate criminal activity and that he is being prosecuted for writing open-source code for a protocol he does not control.

Industry Reaction

Storm expressed his frustration on X (formerly Twitter), stating that the two remaining counts carry a potential sentence of up to 40 years in federal prison. "A jury already couldn't agree this was criminal. But the SDNY prosecutors want to keep trying with the hope of getting a different answer," he wrote.

Legal experts have also criticized the decision. Amanda Tuminelli, legal chief at the DeFi Education Fund, called the DOJ's move "incredibly disappointing," citing the prosecution's previous difficulties in convincing a jury and their alleged misunderstandings of blockchain forensic evidence.

This development occurs alongside a recent US Treasury report to Congress that acknowledged the existence of lawful use cases for crypto mixers, adding a layer of complexity to the ongoing regulatory and legal scrutiny of privacy-focused protocols.