DOJ-OGR-00014782.jpg
612 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
4
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
612 KB
Summary
This document is a transcript from a court proceeding on August 22, 2022, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. An attorney, Mr. Everdell, argues that the commentary on a sentencing guideline for 'dangerous sex offenders' is authoritative guidance from the Sentencing Commission and should be considered by the court. The opposing counsel, Ms. Moe, declines to offer a verbal rebuttal, choosing to rest on her previously filed written arguments.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| MR. EVERDELL | Attorney |
Speaker arguing a point to the court regarding sentencing guidelines.
|
| MS. MOE | Attorney |
Speaker who is addressed by the court and declines to respond further, resting on a prior briefing.
|
| Your Honor | Judge |
Title used to address the judge presiding over the court.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Congress | government agency |
Mentioned in the context of what it was considering when a guideline was created.
|
| Sentencing Commission | government agency |
Cited as the source of authoritative guidance on sentencing.
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
The court reporting agency that transcribed the proceeding.
|
| The government | government agency |
Mentioned as the party making an argument in its papers that Mr. Everdell is refuting.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2022-08-22
An attorney, Mr. Everdell, makes an argument to the court about the authoritative nature of a sentencing guideline's commentary. The opposing counsel, Ms. Moe, declines to respond verbally.
Southern District Court
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied location from the name of the court reporting agency, SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
|
Relationships (3)
Mr. Everdell addresses the court as 'Your Honor' and presents a legal argument for the court's consideration.
Ms. Moe responds directly to the court's question, addressing the judge as 'your Honor'.
They are on opposing sides of a legal argument in a court proceeding. Mr. Everdell refutes a point made by 'the government' (presumably represented by Ms. Moe), and Ms. Moe is given the opportunity to respond.
Key Quotes (3)
"The government in its papers makes the argument that the background commentary can't be relied upon as authoritative because it is not explanatory or interpretative of what the guideline is. I think that is incorrect."Source
— MR. EVERDELL
(Stating his disagreement with the government's position on the sentencing guideline commentary.)
DOJ-OGR-00014782.jpg
Quote #1
"This is authoritative guidance from the Sentencing Commission, and the Court should consider it as such."Source
— MR. EVERDELL
(Concluding his argument about the weight the court should give to the guideline's commentary.)
DOJ-OGR-00014782.jpg
Quote #2
"No, your Honor. We rest on our briefing on this issue, but thank you."Source
— MS. MOE
(Responding to the court's offer to rebut Mr. Everdell's argument.)
DOJ-OGR-00014782.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document