DOJ-OGR-00009547.jpg

717 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

10
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
5
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 717 KB
Summary

This legal document is a page from a court filing, likely an opinion or order, dated February 25, 2022. The court is addressing a defendant's argument for an evidentiary hearing, rejecting it by citing numerous legal precedents that establish a very high standard for post-verdict inquiries into jury conduct. The court emphasizes that motions to set aside verdicts are disfavored and that allowing such inquiries without concrete evidence could lead to negative consequences like jury harassment and tampering.

People (10)

Name Role Context
Baker
Party in the cited case 'Baker, 899 F.3d 123, 130'.
Moon
Party in the cited case 'United States v. Moon, 718 F.2d 1210, 1234'.
Stewart
Party in the cited case 'United States v. Stewart, 317 F. Supp. 2d 432, 443'.
Ianniello
Party in the cited case 'United States v. Ianniello, 866 F.2d 540, 543'.
Maxwell Defendant
Mentioned as the Defendant who filed the 'Maxwell Reply'.
McDonough
Referenced in the context of a 'McDonough hearing'.
Ventura
Party in the cited case 'United States v. Ventura, No. 09-CR-1015 (JGK)'.
Tanner
Party in the cited case 'Tanner v. United States, 483 U.S. 107, 119–20'.
McDonald
Party in the cited case 'McDonald v. Pless, 238 U.S. 264, 267–68'.
Pless
Party in the cited case 'McDonald v. Pless, 238 U.S. 264, 267–68'.

Organizations (3)

Name Type Context
Second Circuit Government agency
Cited as a court that has set legal standards and warnings regarding post-verdict inquiries.
S.D.N.Y. Government agency
Abbreviation for the Southern District of New York court, where cases like 'United States v. Stewart' and 'United Sta...
DOJ Government agency
Appears in the footer as 'DOJ-OGR-00009547', likely indicating the Department of Justice.

Timeline (2 events)

2022-02-09
The Defendant filed the 'Maxwell Reply'.
A potential 'McDonough hearing' is discussed, which would be held based on a juror's nondisclosure during voir dire.

Relationships (1)

Maxwell Adversarial (Legal) The Court
The Defendant (Maxwell) is arguing against the standard being applied by the Court for an evidentiary hearing.

Key Quotes (5)

"[g]ossip and anonymous tips do not satisfy this standard."
Source
— United States v. Moon (Quoted in Baker, establishing that mere gossip is insufficient for legal action.)
DOJ-OGR-00009547.jpg
Quote #1
"[a]llegations of impropriety must be ‘concrete allegations of inappropriate conduct that constitute competent and relevant evidence.’"
Source
— United States v. Ianniello (Quoted in Baker, defining the high standard for allegations of impropriety.)
DOJ-OGR-00009547.jpg
Quote #2
"motions to set aside a jury verdict are disfavored."
Source
— United States v. Ventura (Stating the court's general position on challenging jury verdicts.)
DOJ-OGR-00009547.jpg
Quote #3
"post-verdict inquiries may lead to evil consequences: subjecting juries to harassment, inhibiting juryroom deliberation, burdening courts with meritless applications, increasing temptation for jury tampering and creating uncertainty in jury verdicts."
Source
— Ianniello (A warning from the Second Circuit about the dangers of questioning jury verdicts after the fact.)
DOJ-OGR-00009547.jpg
Quote #4
"is not held to afford a convicted defendant the opportunity ‘to conduct a fishing expedition.’"
Source
— Moon (Quoted in Stewart, explaining that an evidentiary hearing is not for speculative investigation by the defendant.)
DOJ-OGR-00009547.jpg
Quote #5

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document