DOJ-OGR-00001276.jpg

682 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

1
People
5
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
1
Relationships
1
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 682 KB
Summary

This legal document, a page from a court filing dated March 22, 2021, discusses the legal standard for a defendant's third motion for release on bail. The central issue is whether the court has jurisdiction to decide the motion while the defendant's separate bail appeal is pending, with the document citing case law and the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to outline the court's authority in such a situation.

People (1)

Name Role Context
Rodgers Party in a cited case
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Rodgers, 101 F.3d 247, 251 (2d Cir. 1996)'.

Organizations (5)

Name Type Context
The Court Judicial body
Referred to throughout the document as the decision-making body in the case.
The Government Government agency
The opposing party to the Defendant, which opposed the motion for release on bail.
United States Government
Mentioned in the context of a case name ('United States v. Rodgers'), the Eighth Amendment to the United States Const...
court of appeals Judicial body
Mentioned as the body that gains jurisdiction after an appeal is filed.
district court Judicial body
Mentioned as the body that is divested of control over aspects of a case involved in an appeal.

Timeline (3 events)

2021-02-23
The Defendant filed a third motion for release on bail.
Defendant
2021-03-09
The Government opposed the Defendant’s motion for release on bail.
The Government Defendant
2021-03-16
The Defendant filed her reply under temporary seal.
Defendant

Locations (1)

Location Context
Mentioned in relation to the United States Constitution and the Bail Reform Act.

Relationships (1)

Defendant Adversarial (legal) The Government
The document states that 'The Government opposed the Defendant’s motion' for release on bail.

Key Quotes (1)

"As a general matter, ‘the filing of a notice of appeal is an event of jurisdictional significance— it confers jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests the district court of its control over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal.’"
Source
— United States v. Rodgers, 101 F.3d 247, 251 (2d Cir. 1996) (Cited as a legal principle regarding the divestiture of jurisdiction when an appeal is filed.)
DOJ-OGR-00001276.jpg
Quote #1

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document