Levy moves to quash subpoena in fraud case
Former Suffolk County Legis. George Guldi outside the courtroom in Riverhead. (Jan. 18, 2011) Credit: Joseph D. Sullivan
Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy, using the county attorney, moved Wednesday to quash the subpoena served on him to testify in the trial of former Legis. George Guldi, who is facing charges of insurance fraud.
Dan Aug, Levy's spokesman, said the county executive moved to quash the subpoena because "we're not going to be used as a pawn to turn Mr. Guldi's forgery trial into a political sideshow through the use of blatantly false and unsubstantiated aspersions from a desperate criminal defendant."
Guldi declined to comment on Levy's action, which is scheduled for a hearing Tuesday in Riverhead before acting State Supreme Court Justice James F.X. Doyle.
The county executive went to court a day after newly released but heavily redacted court documents disclosed that a key witness in Guldi's trial, longtime Levy friend Ethan Ellner, told prosecutors an unnamed official asked him for money to get county work. The documents quoted Ellner as calling the payment a "bribe."
Presiding Officer William Lindsay questioned Levy's use of the taxpayer-funded county attorney in what he characterized as a private legal matter. "Someone's got to make the case how is this connected to county business," he said. "I'm not so sure there is any county involvement here."
In legal papers, County Attorney Christine Malafi called Guldi's subpoena of Levy "grossly unfair" and said it would "seriously interfere with his government duties" and was "done solely to harass the county executive." Guldi's subpoena is deficient, she added, because it does not detail the information sought from the county executive, and because Levy has "absolutely no information" regarding the criminal charges against Guldi.
Malafi, through a Levy spokesman late Wednesday, issued a statement defending her office's role in the case: "The county attorney's office routinely makes motions to quash subpoenas served against the county executive in matters in which he has no personal knowledge. The subpoena served by Mr. Guldi was served on the county executive as the county executive."
