Legal Document - DOJ-OGR-00020771 | Trove Document Archive

Processing Document...

0%

Initializing...

Extraction Summary

3

People

6

Organizations

0

Locations

1

Events

3

Relationships

1

Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document

File Size: 670 KB

Summary

This legal document analyzes the application of the § 3283 statute of limitations, particularly in cases involving child sex abuse and war frauds. It examines arguments made by 'Maxwell' and contrasts interpretations from Supreme Court cases like *Bridges v. United States* with those from the Second Circuit in *Weingarten* and the PROTECT Act. The document concludes that the legislative history and plain meaning of the statute support a broader application rather than a narrow one.

People (3)

Name	Role	Context
Maxwell		Contends that using a case-specific approach for § 3283 would be impractical; relies on Bridges v. United States.
Schneider		Quoted in the document regarding Congress's intent for the PROTECT Act.
Dodge		Party in the case United States v. Dodge, which is quoted.

Organizations (6)

Name	Type	Context
Government	government agency	Would need to prove conduct beyond the elements of the offense; this approach requires the Government to prove some a...
United States	government agency	Party in Bridges v. United States and United States v. Dodge; mentioned in context of 'defrauding the United States'.
Supreme Court	government agency	In Bridges addressed a statute that extended the limitations period; first concluded that making false statements was...
Second Circuit	government agency	Explained in Weingarten that Congress had the opposite intent in enacting the PROTECT Act.
Congress	government agency	Intended the statute to apply only to a narrow class of war frauds; had the opposite intent in enacting the PROTECT A...
11th Cir.	government agency	Cited as the court for United States v. Dodge, 597 F.3d 1347, 1355 (11th Cir. 2010) (en banc).

Timeline (1 events)

Discussion and interpretation of the application of § 3283 statute of limitations, referencing Supreme Court and Circuit Court precedents regarding war frauds and child sex abuse statutes.

Maxwell Government Supreme Court Second Circuit Congress

View

Relationships (3)

Maxwell → adversarial (litigant) → Government

Maxwell nonetheless contends that... the Government would need to prove...

Bridges → adversarial (litigant) → United States

Maxwell relies primarily on Bridges v. United States

Dodge → adversarial (litigant) → United States

quoting United States v. Dodge

Key Quotes (1)

"cast a wide net to ensnare as many offenses against children as possible."

Source

— Congress (Describing Congress's general intention in passing recent statutes related to child sex abuse, including extensions of the § 3283 limitations period.)

DOJ-OGR-00020771.jpg

Quote #1