DOJ-OGR-00020782.jpg

637 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

5
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 637 KB
Summary

This legal document is a court opinion from case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on April 16, 2021. The court concludes that perjury charges against the defendant, Maxwell, are legally tenable and can be presented to a jury. However, the court rules that these perjury charges must be severed and tried separately from the Mann Act counts to avoid undue prejudice to the defendant, citing potential issues with admitting evidence of other acts and the risk of disqualifying Maxwell's chosen counsel.

People (5)

Name Role Context
Maxwell Defendant
Mentioned as the defendant whose perjury charges are being discussed for severance from Mann Act counts.
Gaudin
Mentioned in the case citation 'Gaudin, 515 U.S. at 509'.
Kross
Mentioned in the case citation 'Kross, 14 F.3d at 753–54'.
Sampson
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Sampson, 898 F.3d 270, 281 (2d Cir. 2018)'.
Walker
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Walker, 142 F.3d 103, 110 (2d Cir. 1998)'.

Organizations (2)

Name Type Context
The Government government agency
Mentioned as the prosecuting party in the case against Maxwell.
The Court judicial body
The judicial body making the ruling on severing the perjury charges.

Timeline (2 events)

2021-04-16
Document 207 in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN was filed.
The Court ruled that the perjury charges against Maxwell must be severed and tried separately from the Mann Act counts.

Relationships (1)

Maxwell adversarial (legal) The Government
The document describes a criminal case where 'The Government' is the prosecuting party and 'Maxwell' is the defendant.

Key Quotes (3)

"invading the ‘inviolable function of the jury’ in our criminal justice system,"
Source
— United States v. Sampson (cited by the court) (Used to explain why courts must guard against resolving certain factual disputes before trial.)
DOJ-OGR-00020782.jpg
Quote #1
"defense raises a factual dispute that is inextricably intertwined with a defendant’s potential culpability, a judge cannot resolve that dispute on a Rule 12(b) motion."
Source
— United States v. Sampson (cited by the court) (Quoted from a legal precedent to support the conclusion that the perjury charges are legally tenable for a jury.)
DOJ-OGR-00020782.jpg
Quote #2
"solely the adverse effect of being tried for two crimes rather than"
Source
— United States v. Walker (cited by the court) (Used to describe a level of harm to a defendant that is insufficient on its own to warrant severance of charges.)
DOJ-OGR-00020782.jpg
Quote #3

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document