A panel of federal appeals judges appeared highly skeptical Tuesday of an attempt by Sam Bankman-Fried’s attorneys to see the onetime crypto mogul’s historic conviction overturned. During a court hearing in lower Manhattan, the judges pressed Bankman-Fried’s new attorney, Alexandra Shapiro, on the merits of her arguments as to why the disgraced FTX founder’s 25-year sentence should be overturned.  Last year, Bankman-Fried was sentenced to a quarter century in prison for seven counts of fraud, money laundering, and conspiracy. The jury took less than five hours to deliberate.  During Tuesday’s hearing, Shapiro focused mainly on two claims: that Bankman-Fried was limited in his ability to discuss improper advice he received from counsel during his initial trial, and that the jury in the case was misinformed about the extent to which FTX’s victims would eventually be made whole.  All three circuit judges weighing the appeal—Barrington Parker, Eunice Lee, and Maria Araujo Kahn—immediately voiced skepticism regarding both arguments. Judge Parker, for instance, pointed out Bankman-Fried testified at trial that the former crypto mogul did not rely on the advice of lawyers when he improperly siphoned billions of dollars from FTX into the exchange’s sister trading firm, Alameda Research. “That’s not fair,” Bankman-Fried’s attorney replied to the observation, according to courthouse reporter Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press.  “Are you seriously suggesting to us that if your client had been able to testify about the role that attorneys played in preparing these various documents, the not-guilty verdicts would have rolled in?” Parker soon after asked Shapiro, according to AP.  Shapiro then pivoted to another argument—that jurors were improperly told at trial that FTX lost customers billions of dollars, when those sums could have been repaid by the exchange had there been enough time. That line of thinking mirrors one put forth in a post made to Bankman-Fried’s X account last week, which claimed FTX was never actually insolvent. But the judges shot down that argument just as quickly today, noting that victims of a crime being eventually made whole is not a valid legal defense.  The three circuit judges will rule on Bankman-Fried’s appeal at a later date.