DOJ-OGR-00021459.jpg
993 KB
Extraction Summary
8
People
6
Organizations
3
Locations
3
Events
2
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
993 KB
Summary
This legal document analyzes the ambiguity of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) concerning when victims' rights attach, particularly before formal charges are filed. It notes that at the time of the 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) in the Epstein case, court precedent was sparse and divided, a situation that continued as of the writing of this report. Because the law was not clear, the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) concluded that the prosecutors' failure to consult with victims before signing the NPA did not constitute professional misconduct.
People (8)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| William Barr | Attorney General |
Recipient of a November 21, 2019 letter from a Congressional Representative regarding legislation on victims' rights.
|
| Epstein |
Mentioned in the context of "the Epstein case," which led to CVRA litigation.
|
|
| Searcy | Litigant |
Named party in the case citation Searcy v. Paletz.
|
| Paletz | Litigant |
Named party in the case citation Searcy v. Paletz.
|
| Turner | Litigant |
Named party in the case citation United States v. Turner.
|
| Guevara-Toloso | Litigant |
Named party in the case citation United States v. Guevara-Toloso.
|
| Wild |
Named party in the case citation See Wild, 955 F.3d at 1220 and the namesake of the Courtney Wild Crime Victims’ Righ...
|
|
| Smith | Litigant |
Named party in the case citation Attorney Griev. Comm’n of Md. v. Smith.
|
Organizations (6)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| BP Products | company |
Mentioned as a case opinion relied upon by a court, which was decided after the NPA was signed.
|
| Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals | government agency |
A panel of this court reached a contrary conclusion to a district court regarding when CVRA rights apply.
|
| Supreme Court | government agency |
Mentioned as not having addressed the issue of when CVRA rights apply.
|
| Department | government agency |
Presumably the Department of Justice, which had concluded that CVRA rights did not apply pre-charge.
|
| OPR | government agency |
Office of Professional Responsibility, which concluded that prosecutors' failure to consult victims did not constitut...
|
| Court of Appeals of Maryland | government agency |
Cited in a footnote for the case Attorney Griev. Comm’n of Md. v. Smith, where it found a prosecutor's actions consti...
|
Timeline (3 events)
Locations (3)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
District courts in New York had ruled that victim standing under the CVRA attached only upon the filing of federal ch...
|
|
|
District courts in South Carolina had ruled that victim standing under the CVRA attached only upon the filing of fede...
|
|
|
Mentioned in the context of the Court of Appeals of Maryland and the Maryland Constitution.
|
Relationships (2)
prosecutors
→
professional
→
victims
The document discusses the legal obligation, or lack thereof, for prosecutors to consult with victims before filing federal criminal charges, specifically under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA).
The representative sent a letter to Attorney General William Barr regarding proposed legislation.
Key Quotes (5)
"prosecution stage"Source
— unspecified
(Used to describe the period when victims' rights began, which was when charges were filed.)
DOJ-OGR-00021459.jpg
Quote #1
"[c]larify that victims of federal crimes have the right to confer with the Government and be informed about key pre-charging developments in a case, such as . . . non-prosecution agreements."Source
— a Congressional Representative
(From a November 21, 2019 letter to Attorney General William Barr, describing the purpose of recently introduced legislation.)
DOJ-OGR-00021459.jpg
Quote #2
"should"Source
— 2005 Guidelines
(A footnote explains this term means an employee is expected to take an action unless there is an appropriate, articulable reason not to.)
DOJ-OGR-00021459.jpg
Quote #3
"consistent failure"Source
— Court of Appeals of Maryland
(Describing a prosecutor's failure to provide notice to a victim's family in the case of Attorney Griev. Comm’n of Md. v. Smith.)
DOJ-OGR-00021459.jpg
Quote #4
"gross negligence in the discharge of the prosecutorial function"Source
— Court of Appeals of Maryland
(The conclusion reached by the court regarding a prosecutor's failure to provide notice to a victim's family in the case of Attorney Griev. Comm’n of Md. v. Smith.)
DOJ-OGR-00021459.jpg
Quote #5
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document