DOJ-OGR-00008791.jpg
648 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
1
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
648 KB
Summary
This legal document, dated December 27, 2021, is a filing addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the trial of Ms. Maxwell. The filing argues that without specific jury instructions, there is a risk of the jury convicting Ms. Maxwell based on a 'constructive amendment' to the indictment, which would be a per se violation of her constitutional rights. The argument is supported by citing several legal precedents from the Second Circuit and the Southern District of New York.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Alison J. Nathan | The Honorable |
Recipient of the document, presumably the presiding judge.
|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant |
The subject of the legal argument, who could be convicted by the jury.
|
| Gross | Defendant |
A party in the cited case United States v. Gross.
|
| D'Amelio | Defendant |
A party in the cited case United States v. D'Amelio.
|
| Wozniak | Defendant |
A party in the cited case United States v. Wozniak.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Court | government agency |
Mentioned as having recently explained the law on constructive amendment and variance.
|
| S.D.N.Y. | government agency |
Southern District of New York, the court where the United States v. Gross case was decided.
|
| Second Circuit | government agency |
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, cited for its legal precedents.
|
Timeline (3 events)
1997
A ruling was made in the case of United States v. Wozniak, 126 F.3d 105, 109-10 (2d Cir. 1997).
Second Circuit
2012
A ruling was made in the case of United States v. D’Amelio, 683 F.3d 412, 417 (2d Cir. 2012).
Second Circuit
2017-10-18
A ruling was made in the case of United States v. Gross, No. 15-cr-769 (AJN), 2017 WL 4685111, at *20 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 18, 2017).
S.D.N.Y.
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Abbreviation for the Southern District of New York, a federal judicial district.
|
Relationships (1)
The document is a legal filing addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan concerning the trial of the defendant, Ms. Maxwell.
Key Quotes (5)
"To prevail on a constructive amendment claim, a defendant must demonstrate that the terms of [an] indictment are in effect altered by the presentation of evidence and jury instructions which so modify essential elements of the offense charged that there is a substantial likelihood that the defendant may have been convicted of an offense other than that charged in the indictment."Source
— United States v. Gross
(Quoted to define the legal standard for a constructive amendment claim.)
DOJ-OGR-00008791.jpg
Quote #1
"Because the doctrine of constructive amendment protects a defendant’s Grand Jury Clause rights, a constructive amendment constitutes a ‘per se violation’ of the defendant’s constitutional rights— i.e. there is no requirement that a defendant make a specific showing of prejudice."Source
— United States v. Gross
(Quoted to explain that a constructive amendment is a per se violation of rights.)
DOJ-OGR-00008791.jpg
Quote #2
"consistently permitted significant flexibility"Source
— Second Circuit
(Describing the Second Circuit's approach to how the government proves an alleged crime.)
DOJ-OGR-00008791.jpg
Quote #3
"given notice of the core of criminality to be proven at trial."Source
— Id. (cleaned up)
(Stating the requirement for what a defendant must be notified of.)
DOJ-OGR-00008791.jpg
Quote #4
"[A]lthough an indictment ‘drawn in general terms’ may articulate a broad core of criminality, an indictment that is drawn in specific terms may be read to specify a narrower set of facts—such that the proof of completely distinct facts at trial could lead to a constructive amendment."Source
— United States v. Wozniak
(Quoted to explain how a specific indictment can lead to a constructive amendment if different facts are proven at trial.)
DOJ-OGR-00008791.jpg
Quote #5
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document