DOJ-OGR-00003133.jpg
714 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
0
Relationships
1
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
714 KB
Summary
This legal document is a court's discussion regarding a defendant's motion to dismiss two counts of an indictment, arguing they are multiplicitous (i.e., charge the same crime multiple times). The Court decides that the motion is premature and defers its ruling until after the trial is complete. The Court reasons that a full factual record is needed for the analysis and the issue could become moot depending on the jury's verdict.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Rivera | Party in a cited case |
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Rivera, No. 09 Cr. 619 (SJF), 2011 WL 1429125, at *4 (E.D.N.Y. Apr. ...
|
| Josephberg | Party in a cited case |
Mentioned in the case citation 'See Josephberg, 459 F.3d at 355'.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States | Government agency |
Mentioned as a party in the case citation 'United States v. Rivera'.
|
| Second Circuit | Government agency |
Mentioned as providing a directive that the Court is following to defer ruling on the motion.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned in a case citation as the Eastern District of New York.
|
Key Quotes (1)
"Since it is possible that the jury will convict defendants on only one (1) of the respective counts that they allege are multiplicitous, and acquit defendants on all of the counts with which they allege that count is multiplicitous, the issue of whether the counts are multiplicitous in violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause is premature at the pretrial stage."Source
— United States v. Rivera
(A quote from a cited legal case used to support the Court's decision to defer its ruling.)
DOJ-OGR-00003133.jpg
Quote #1
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document