09/02/2026
The trial is over. The case is not.
Kevin O’Brien recently joined Larry Sharpe to discuss the Demetrio Daga case, what happened at trial, and why the defense believes there are significant constitutional and appellate issues that remain to be addressed.
The jury returned its verdict, and we respect the jury’s role in our system.
But a verdict does not end the conversation about how a prosecution was built, whether constitutional protections were honored, or whether the punishment being sought actually fits the conduct.
Demetrio had no criminal history. He did not sell fi****ms or drugs. He threatened no one. He used no fi***rm against another person. No one was harmed.
At trial, serious questions were raised concerning the extensive surveillance of Demetrio and his family, the use of Flock cameras, representations made by investigators during the warrant process, and the methods ultimately used to obtain evidence against him.
Those issues matter regardless of how anyone feels about fi****ms or New York’s gun laws.
And so does proportionality.
A justice system should be able to distinguish between dangerous, violent conduct and technical violations committed by a nonviolent person who harmed no one.
We believe the potential punishment in this case is profoundly disproportionate, and we believe there are substantial issues that should be reviewed on appeal.
This interview goes into the case, the trial, and where the fight goes from here.
📺 Watch the full conversation with Larry Sharpe:
https://www.youtube.com/live/n8oFl9t_BX8?si=uo9_GtAxY5RkH2q7
If you believe due process, constitutional protections, government accountability, and proportional justice matter, we encourage you to watch and share this conversation.
The trial may be over. Our advocacy for our client is not.