It will be interesting to see how the judge tries to wiggle out of that.
Judges don't wriggle. They issue rulings. And when in doubt, they rule as they deem best and let the higher courts deal with any technical (Court of Appeals) or larger constitutional (SCOTUS) issues if they come up. Many times those higher courts decline to rule on (CoA) or even hear (SCOTUS) the case. More often than not, the ruling of the lower court is affirmed on appeal anyway. On those fairly rare occasions when a lower court is overruled by a higher court, it generally only results in the case being sent back to the lower court for a new trial. It's not a "get out of jail free" card. The circuit courts conduct trials. The CoA and SCOTUS don't try cases. Or dismiss them. They serve more as the US legal system's quality control department.
So barring Ulbricht's motion coming before an extremely sympathetic judge, it will most likely be dismissed with little comment. (Yes, US judges can
Despite what you see on TV shows, most US judges are extremely
loathe to dismiss serious charges (especially when subsequent corroborating evidence backs up the substance of the charges made) on purely technical grounds. At least for anything other than a case where the strong chance of capital punishment is on the menu.