DOJ-OGR-00011538.jpg
614 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript (sentencing hearing)
File Size:
614 KB
Summary
This document is page 19 of a court transcript from a sentencing hearing filed on July 22, 2022, in Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). Defense attorney Mr. Everdell argues that the 2003 sentencing guidelines should apply rather than the 2004 guidelines to avoid violating the Ex Post Facto Clause, noting that the Probation Department recommended a downward variance to 240 months despite a calculated range of 292-365 months.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. Everdell | Defense Counsel |
Addressing the court regarding sentencing guidelines and Ex Post Facto Clause arguments.
|
| The Court / Your Honor | Judge |
Presiding over the hearing, inviting Mr. Everdell to speak.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Probation Department |
Calculated sentencing range of 292-365 months and recommended 240 months.
|
|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Produced the transcript.
|
|
| The Government |
Referenced by Everdell regarding their response to defense arguments.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2022-07-22
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied by the reporter's name (likely SDNY).
|
Relationships (1)
Everdell is arguing for specific sentencing guidelines favorable to the defense ('our initial argument').
Key Quotes (4)
"correct calculation is 360 to 660 months' imprisonment"Source
DOJ-OGR-00011538.jpg
Quote #1
"The probation department has calculated the range at 292 to 365 months' imprisonment, but recommends a downward variance to a term of 240 months' imprisonment."Source
DOJ-OGR-00011538.jpg
Quote #2
"We argue that that is a jury determination because the issue implicates the Ex Post Facto Clause."Source
DOJ-OGR-00011538.jpg
Quote #3
"So the 2003 guidelines must apply because the jury was never asked to make that factual determination."Source
DOJ-OGR-00011538.jpg
Quote #4
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document