DOJ-OGR-00003112.jpg
750 KB
Extraction Summary
7
People
3
Organizations
2
Locations
0
Events
0
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court filing / legal memorandum
File Size:
750 KB
Summary
This document is page 178 (Bates DOJ-OGR-00003112) of a filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), dated April 16, 2021. It is a legal memorandum discussing Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 7 and the standards for the sufficiency of an indictment. The text cites various legal precedents (Alfonso, Resendiz-Ponce, Wey, Stringer) to argue that an indictment generally does not need to specify evidentiary details or how an offense was committed, provided it tracks the statutory language and protects against double jeopardy.
People (7)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Alfonso | Case Citation Subject |
United States v. Alfonso (2d. Cir. 1998)
|
| Resendiz-Ponce | Case Citation Subject |
United States v. Resendiz-Ponce (2007)
|
| Hamling | Case Citation Subject |
Hamling (418 U.S. at 117)
|
| Wey | Case Citation Subject |
United States v. Wey (S.D.N.Y. 2017)
|
| Coffey | Case Citation Subject |
United States v. Coffey (E.D.N.Y. 2005)
|
| Stringer | Case Citation Subject |
United States v. Stringer (2d Cir. 2013)
|
| Walsh | Case Citation Subject |
United States v. Walsh (2d Cir. 1999)
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States District Court |
Implied by Case Number 1:20-cr-00330-PAE and S.D.N.Y. citations
|
|
| Second Circuit Court of Appeals |
Cited in legal precedents
|
|
| Department of Justice |
Bates stamp prefix DOJ-OGR
|
Key Quotes (4)
"the sufficiency of the evidence is not appropriately addressed on a pretrial motion to dismiss an indictment."Source
DOJ-OGR-00003112.jpg
Quote #1
"an indictment “must be a plain, concise, and definite written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged . . . .”"Source
DOJ-OGR-00003112.jpg
Quote #2
"“[a]n indictment does not . . . ‘have to specify evidence or details of how the offence was committed.’”"Source
DOJ-OGR-00003112.jpg
Quote #3
"the Second Circuit “has repeatedly refused, in the absence of any showing of prejudice, to dismiss . . . charges for lack of specificity.”"Source
DOJ-OGR-00003112.jpg
Quote #4
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document