DOJ-OGR-00021891.jpg
664 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
6
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal opinion / court filing (appellate ruling)
File Size:
664 KB
Summary
This document is page 14 of a legal ruling filed on December 2, 2024 (Case 22-1426), likely from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The court affirms the District Court's decision to deny Ghislaine Maxwell's motion to dismiss Counts Three and Four of her indictment. The court rules that the offenses involving sexual abuse of minors fall within the extended statute of limitations provided by 18 U.S.C. § 3283 and that the 2003 amendment to this statute was correctly applied retroactively.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ghislaine Maxwell | Defendant/Appellant |
Arguing that specific counts of her indictment were untimely based on statute of limitations.
|
| Weingarten | Legal Precedent |
Cited in case law 'Weingarten v. United States' regarding the application of statute of limitations.
|
| Sampson | Legal Precedent |
Cited in case law 'United States v. Sampson'.
|
Organizations (6)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| District Court |
The lower court whose decision is being reviewed (likely S.D.N.Y.).
|
|
| The Government |
The prosecution in the case against Maxwell.
|
|
| Congress |
Legislative body mentioned regarding the intent of statutory amendments.
|
|
| 2d Cir. |
Second Circuit Court of Appeals (implied by case citations in footnotes).
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice (referenced in Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00021891).
|
|
| S.D.N.Y. |
Southern District of New York (referenced in footnote citation).
|
Timeline (2 events)
2024-12-02
Document filing date indicating the appellate court is upholding the District Court's denial of Maxwell's motion.
Court
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Southern District of New York (Court jurisdiction).
|
Relationships (1)
Maxwell argues against the Government's application of the statute of limitations.
Key Quotes (4)
"The District Court therefore correctly denied Maxwell’s motion without an evidentiary hearing."Source
DOJ-OGR-00021891.jpg
Quote #1
"On both points, we disagree and hold that the District Court correctly denied Maxwell’s motions to dismiss the charges as untimely."Source
DOJ-OGR-00021891.jpg
Quote #2
"Counts Three and Four of the Indictment are offenses involving the sexual abuse of minors."Source
DOJ-OGR-00021891.jpg
Quote #3
"Congress intended courts to apply § 3283 using a case-specific"Source
DOJ-OGR-00021891.jpg
Quote #4
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document