DOJ-OGR-00009597.jpg

617 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

4
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
5
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 617 KB
Summary

This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that the defendant's (Maxwell's) due process claim should be denied. The court asserts that she has failed to demonstrate actual prejudice from a pre-indictment delay or that the Government's delay was for an improper purpose. The document cites legal precedents, including United States v. Marion, to emphasize that the statute of limitations is the main safeguard against stale charges and that cases brought within that period hold a strong presumption of validity.

People (4)

Name Role Context
Maxwell Defendant
Mentioned in the context of the Government's delay in bringing charges and her ability to prepare a defense.
Marion Party in a legal case
Cited in the legal case United States v. Marion, 404 U.S. 307, 322 (1971).
Cornielle Party in a legal case
Cited in the legal case United States v. Cornielle, 171 F.3d 748, 752 (2d Cir. 1999).
Lawson Party in a legal case
Cited in the legal case United States v. Lawson, 683 F.2d 688, 694 (2d Cir. 1982).

Organizations (2)

Name Type Context
Government government agency
Referred to as the prosecuting party whose delay in bringing charges is being discussed.
Court government agency
Referred to as the judicial body making findings and decisions in the case.

Timeline (1 events)

2022-02-25
Document 621 was filed in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE.

Relationships (1)

Maxwell adversarial (legal) Government
The document details the legal conflict between the defendant (Maxwell) and the prosecutor (Government) regarding a due process claim.

Key Quotes (5)

"nothing in the record indicates that the Government’s delay in bringing these charges was designed to thwart Maxwell’s ability to prepare a defense."
Source
— The Court (A previous finding by the Court regarding the Government's pre-indictment delay.)
DOJ-OGR-00009597.jpg
Quote #1
"the primary guarantee against bringing overly stale criminal charges."
Source
— United States v. Marion (A quote describing the purpose of the statute of limitations.)
DOJ-OGR-00009597.jpg
Quote #2
"only rarely dismissed,"
Source
— Legal Precedent (Describing cases that are brought within the statute of limitations.)
DOJ-OGR-00009597.jpg
Quote #3
"strong presumption of validity."
Source
— United States v. Cornielle (Describing the status of a case brought within the statute of limitations.)
DOJ-OGR-00009597.jpg
Quote #4
"applicable statute of limitations” does not “bar[] the charges here."
Source
— The Court (A footnote quoting a previous finding by the Court.)
DOJ-OGR-00009597.jpg
Quote #5

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document