Miami Attorney DEA Bribery Case Suddenly Dropped

Shocking Manhattan Court Reversal Ends Multi-Year Federal Investigation

In a stunning turn of events that sent shockwaves through Miami’s legal community, prosecutors abruptly dropped all criminal charges against prominent defense attorney David Macey on August 28, 2025. The case, which accused Macey of orchestrating a $73,000 bribery scheme involving former DEA agents, collapsed in Manhattan federal court despite years of investigation and wiretapped evidence.

The sudden reversal highlights the challenges federal prosecutors face when trying to prove intent and quid pro quo arrangements in complex corruption cases. For Macey, who had maintained his innocence throughout the ordeal, the outcome represents a rare victory against federal prosecutors with seemingly strong evidence.

The Rise and Fall of a Federal Case

The charges against David Macey, 54, stemmed from a multi-year DEA corruption probe that had already resulted in the conviction of two former agents. As part of Miami’s so-called “white powder bar” – high-priced defense lawyers who specialize in negotiating surrender deals for Latin American drug traffickers – Macey was accused of crossing ethical lines to gain insider information.

The allegations were serious. Prosecutors claimed Macey lavished former DEA agents John Costanzo and Manny Recio with cash, gifts, Yankees-Red Sox baseball tickets, and even helped with a down payment on a condo in suburban Coral Gables. In exchange, authorities said, he received sensitive information about federal indictments and other intelligence that put cases and investigators at risk.

The Deferred Prosecution Agreement

Under the terms of a deferred prosecution agreement announced Thursday in Manhattan federal court, charges against Macey will be dismissed in one year if he complies with the law. Judge Jennifer H. Rearden noted the “extraordinary opportunity” was partly due to Macey’s experienced legal team.

“I feel great. I’m elated,” Macey said, grinning as he walked out of the courthouse and embraced his attorneys. Through his lawyer Shawn Crowley, he expressed gratitude that “the government looked at the facts and determined justice would not be served by continuing this prosecution.”

What Went Wrong for Prosecutors?

Several factors likely contributed to the case’s collapse:

Lack of Clear Quid Pro Quo: Macey’s defense team successfully argued that the indictment failed to establish a direct connection between payments and specific requests for information. “The indictment fails to allege any quid pro quo,” Macey’s attorneys stated in a motion to dismiss. “It instead describes, at best, a formless arrangement of alleged payments as quids (many entirely unlinked to Mr. Macey) and so-called ‘requests’ as quos with no apparent connection between them.”

Prosecutorial Changes: The lead prosecutor, Sheb Swett, no longer works at the U.S. Attorney’s Office, potentially disrupting case continuity.

Compromised Key Witness: A key informant who recorded conversations with the DEA agents has since been indicted in Tampa, Florida, in an alleged extortion plot involving cocaine traffickers, undermining his credibility.

Defense Strategy: Macey’s attorneys portrayed the relationship with Costanzo as a genuine friendship, describing shared meals, holidays, and vacations rather than a transactional arrangement.

The Broader DEA Corruption Scandal

This case represents just one piece of a larger corruption scandal within the DEA. Former agents Recio and Costanzo were sentenced to three and four years in prison respectively after being convicted of searching confidential databases and sharing sensitive information about high-profile investigations.

The wiretapped conversations revealed discussions about:

• The timing of arrests involving associates of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro
• Confidential plans to arrest high-level traffickers in the Dominican Republic
• Database searches for investigations of interest to Miami defense attorneys

Complex Money Trail

Prosecutors alleged that the agents used sophisticated methods to disguise payments, including:

• Routing money through Costanzo’s now-deceased father, a decorated DEA agent
• Creating sham invoices through a company listing a UPS store as its address
• Deleting hundreds of messages and calls to burner phones
• Using intermediaries to obscure financial transactions

What This Means for Federal Corruption Cases

The Macey case highlights the high bar prosecutors must meet in corruption cases. Simply showing payments and favors isn’t enough – they must prove criminal intent and a clear quid pro quo arrangement. This standard protects legitimate business relationships and friendships from being criminalized based on appearance alone.

As part of the agreement, Macey acknowledged that his financial transactions with Costanzo “created at minimum a risk of perceived conflicts of interests.” This admission suggests the importance of maintaining clear boundaries in professional relationships, even when no criminal intent exists.

Ongoing Legal Proceedings

The broader investigation continues with DEA task force officer Edwin Pagan facing a November trial on charges including bribery and perjury. He has pleaded not guilty, and his case will test whether prosecutors can overcome the evidentiary challenges that apparently undermined the Macey prosecution.

Lessons for Legal Professionals

This case offers several important takeaways for legal professionals:

Document Relationships Clearly: Maintain clear records distinguishing personal friendships from professional arrangements.

Avoid Appearance Issues: Even legal conduct can create problems if it appears improper to outside observers.

Experienced Defense Matters: Judge Rearden specifically cited Macey’s experienced legal team as contributing to the favorable outcome.

Federal Standards are High: Prosecutors must prove specific intent and clear quid pro quo arrangements, not just suspicious patterns of behavior.

The Road Ahead

While Macey emerged victorious, the case serves as a cautionary tale about the blurred lines between legitimate networking and potential corruption in high-stakes legal practice. The Miami legal community will undoubtedly scrutinize their own practices in light of this investigation.

The rare deferred prosecution agreement represents a middle ground – acknowledging problematic conduct without requiring a criminal conviction. For Macey, it means freedom but also a year of careful compliance with all laws.

Call to Action

The Macey case demonstrates that even in seemingly overwhelming federal prosecutions, experienced legal defense can prevail when the evidence doesn’t support the charges. Legal professionals facing similar situations should document relationships carefully and seek experienced counsel immediately.

For more analysis of high-profile legal cases and their implications for practitioners, subscribe to our newsletter and share this article with colleagues who need to understand the evolving landscape of federal corruption prosecutions.