Executive Summary
- Sentencing for former Portage Mayor James Snyder has been delayed following the recusal of Judge Gretchen Lund.
- Chief Judge Holly Brady has been assigned the case, with a status hearing set for January 20, 2026.
- Snyder is seeking a new trial on IRS charges, arguing that evidence from overturned bribery charges prejudiced the jury.
- Federal prosecutors oppose the new trial request, labeling it untimely and stating Snyder previously waived severance arguments.
- The U.S. Supreme Court previously overturned Snyder’s bribery conviction, ruling the payment was a gratuity.
The sentencing of former Portage Mayor James Snyder on federal tax fraud charges has been postponed once again following the recusal of U.S. District Judge Gretchen Lund. According to court records filed regarding the case, the hearing originally scheduled for January 14, 2026, has been cancelled. The case has subsequently been reassigned to Chief Judge Holly Brady, who has set a status hearing for January 20, 2026.
Judge Lund officially recused herself on December 19, prompting the administrative change. Snyder’s attorney, Josh Minkler, did not immediately provide a comment regarding the delay. The former mayor is awaiting sentencing on a conviction for obstructing the IRS, a charge stemming from his personal business dealings rather than his official mayoral duties. This conviction has remained unchallenged, unlike other charges in the long-running legal saga.
In October, Snyder filed a motion requesting a new trial regarding the IRS conviction. His defense team argued in court filings that the trial was “infected with constitutional error” because the jury was presented with evidence regarding bribery charges that have since been overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. Snyder’s filing contends that the information related to the bribery allegations may have improperly influenced the jury’s verdict on the tax count.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office has strongly opposed the request for a new trial, describing the motion as “both untimely and meritless.” Prosecutors stated in their response that Snyder made a “strategic decision” in 2019 to face all counts in a single trial rather than requesting they be severed. They argued that by failing to raise the issue of misjoinder before the original trial, the defendant waived his claim to improper joinder. Prosecutors further noted that the parties had previously agreed to proceed to sentencing on the tax count, a claim Snyder’s defense disputes.
The legal proceedings trace back nine years to Snyder’s initial indictment. While a jury convicted him on bribery charges involving a garbage truck contract, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June of the previous year that the $13,000 payment Snyder received constituted a gratuity rather than a bribe under federal law, as the payment occurred after the contract was awarded. Following this ruling, the case was remanded to lower courts. Prosecutors have indicated they intend to forgo a third trial on the bribery charge and instead seek sentencing enhancement on the tax conviction based on the unproven allegations.
Procedural Next Steps
The reassignment of this case to Chief Judge Holly Brady introduces a new procedural phase in a complex litigation history that involves significant appellate rulings. The court must now weigh the finalized IRS conviction against the defense’s argument regarding spillover prejudice from the vacated bribery counts. This sentencing phase will likely test the extent to which conduct from overturned charges can be utilized during sentencing for a separate, upheld conviction. It is important to note that while the tax conviction stands, all individuals are presumed innocent of any unproven charges or allegations until proven guilty in a court of law.
