DOJ-OGR-00014766.jpg
614 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
4
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
614 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from August 22, 2022, detailing a conversation between a judge and a defense counsel, Mr. Everdell, during a sentencing hearing. The judge summarizes the probation department's sentencing recommendation and invites Mr. Everdell to present his arguments. Mr. Everdell argues that the jury, not the court, should determine which version of the sentencing guidelines (2003 or 2004) applies, citing the Ex Post Facto Clause.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. Everdell | Counsel |
Addressed by the judge and presents arguments on behalf of his client regarding sentencing guidelines.
|
| The Judge | Judge |
Presiding over the case, referred to as 'your Honor'. The judge speaks to Counsel (Mr. Everdell) about sentencing arg...
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The probation department | government agency |
Mentioned as having calculated a sentencing range of 292 to 365 months and recommending a downward variance.
|
| The Court | government agency |
Mr. Everdell argues that the Court must resolve who determines which sentencing guidelines book applies.
|
| The government | government agency |
Mentioned by Mr. Everdell as not having engaged with his arguments in their response.
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Listed at the bottom of the page, likely the court reporting service that transcribed the proceedings.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2022-08-22
A discussion during a court proceeding regarding sentencing guidelines, specifically whether the 2003 or 2004 guidelines should apply and who should make that determination.
Courtroom (implied)
Relationships (1)
The document is a transcript of a court proceeding where Mr. Everdell, as Counsel, is presenting legal arguments to the presiding Judge ('your Honor').
Key Quotes (4)
"The probation department has calculated the range at 292 to 365 months' imprisonment, but recommends a downward variance to a term of 240 months' imprisonment."Source
— The Judge (summarizing)
(The judge is summarizing the probation department's sentencing recommendation at the start of the hearing.)
DOJ-OGR-00014766.jpg
Quote #1
"I'll hear from you now, Mr. Everdell."Source
— The Judge
(The judge is giving the floor to the counsel to present his arguments.)
DOJ-OGR-00014766.jpg
Quote #2
"Your Honor, our initial argument, of course, is that the Court must resolve who is to make the determination about which book like -- when the offense conduct ended, which determines guidelines book applies: the 2003 or 2004 guidelines."Source
— Mr. Everdell
(Mr. Everdell is beginning his argument about the applicability of different sentencing guidelines.)
DOJ-OGR-00014766.jpg
Quote #3
"We argue that that is a jury determination because the issue implicates the Ex Post Facto Clause."Source
— Mr. Everdell
(Explaining the legal basis for his argument that the jury should decide which guidelines apply.)
DOJ-OGR-00014766.jpg
Quote #4
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document