Terry Rozier Seeks Dismissal of Federal Betting Case

Miami Heat guard Terry Rozier wants a federal judge to throw out the sports betting case against him. The 31-year-old argues that prosecutors have been stretching the law and solely leaning on thin evidence in their attempt to turn a state-level matter into a federal crime.

Rozier Addresses the Supreme Court’s Decisions 

In a motion to dismiss dated December 12 and made public this week, the player pointed to a series of US Supreme Court decisions that he said undercut the government’s case. 

Rozier, who pleaded not guilty earlier this month, has been away from the team since his October indictment after being charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and money laundering.

Rozier strongly believes that federal prosecutors are making use of broad statutes in a way is counterintuitive to what the Supreme Court intended them. Namely, to use federal law as a “tool to criminalize conduct traditionally regulated by the states.”

Rozier also pushes back on what he describes as the gap between the government’s public narrative and what the indictment actually alleges. 

All On a Game

Despite claims of insider betting and game manipulation, he argues the case boils down to something far more limited. “The indictment alleges something less headline-worthy: that some bettors broke certain sportsbooks’ terms of use against wagering based on non-public information and ‘straw betting,’” the filing says.

The motion emphasizes that the indictment centers on a single game. Prosecutors allege that in March 2023, when Rozier was still with the Charlotte Hornets, he told a childhood friend that he would pretend to be injured and exit a game early. 

That friend is also accused of passing the information along to bettors. Rozier left the game in the first quarter and finished with just five points and two assists, well below his usual performance.

A former federal prosecutor told Front Office Sports in October that focusing on one game does not necessarily mean the case is narrow. 

“You’re never going to get the full scope in the indictment,” the former prosecutor said. “When you’re talking about a broad conspiracy like this, usually the majority of evidence is not spelled out in the indictment.”

The Ciminelli Example

Rozier’s filing also addressed specific concerns that were raised by prosecutors regarding his decision to pay for his friend’s legal defense. 

The government suggested that the arrangement could create conflicts of interest, but Rozier called the claim unfounded.

Central to the motion is a 2023 Supreme Court ruling that overturned convictions in the “Buffalo Billion” case. In Ciminelli v. U.S., the Court unanimously rejected a broad interpretation of wire fraud. 

Rozier’s lawyers argue the same logic applies here. “This is the precise theory of fraud that the Supreme Court rejected in Ciminelli,” the motion states.

Taken together, the charges amount to “precisely the kind of overreach the Court has cautioned against for decades,” Rozier argues,