HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017617.jpg
2.34 MB
Extraction Summary
5
People
7
Organizations
2
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal brief / law journal excerpt
File Size:
2.34 MB
Summary
This document is page 14 of a legal filing or journal article (104 J. Crim. L. & Criminology) submitted to the House Oversight Committee by David Schoen. It argues against the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) restrictive interpretation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically regarding whether victim rights attach before formal charges are filed. The text analyzes and distinguishes prior case law (Turner, Paletz, Skinner), arguing that these cases do not preclude CVRA rights during the investigation phase.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| David Schoen | Attorney/Author |
Name appears at the bottom of the page, likely the submitter of the document.
|
| Turner | Defendant/Case Subject |
Referenced in case law 'Turner', discussed regarding victim identification.
|
| Paletz | Defendant/Case Subject |
Referenced in case law 'Searcy v. Paletz' involving a pro se civil suit.
|
| Skinner | Plaintiff/Case Subject |
Referenced in case law involving an inmate suit.
|
| Searcy | Plaintiff |
Plaintiff in Searcy v. Paletz (cited in footnotes).
|
Organizations (7)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| OLC |
Office of Legal Counsel, criticized for its memorandum regarding CVRA rights.
|
|
| Department |
Department of Justice (DOJ), referred to regarding its legal position.
|
|
| Federal Bureau of Prisons |
Defendant in the Paletz case.
|
|
| FBI |
Defendant in the Paletz case.
|
|
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas |
Court that issued an opinion criticizing the interpretation of Skinner and Paletz.
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Implied by the Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT'.
|
|
| Second Circuit |
Court of Appeals mentioned in footnote 112.
|
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Jurisdiction of a court opinion cited.
|
|
|
District of South Carolina (implied by case citations in footnotes).
|
Relationships (2)
Name David Schoen appears on document with House Oversight Bates stamp.
Key Quotes (5)
"The judge suggested that 'any person who self-identifies as [a victim]' could be presumed to qualify for protection under the CVRA as a preliminary matter."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017617.jpg
Quote #1
"The full sentence reads: 'While the offense charged against a defendant can [*79] serve as a basis for identifying a 'crime victim' as defined in the CVRA, the class of victims with statutory rights may well be broader.'"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017617.jpg
Quote #2
"OLC [*80] vastly overstates its position when it asserts"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017617.jpg
Quote #3
"CVRA is designed to give victims certain rights 'within the prosecutorial process against a criminal defendant.'"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017617.jpg
Quote #4
"reading these two decisions as standing for the proposition that charges must be filed for CVRA rights to attach 'appears inconsistent with the CVRA recognition of certain subsection (a) rights that apply during investigation, before any charging instrument is filed.'"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017617.jpg
Quote #5
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document