DOJ-OGR-00001922.jpg
649 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
4
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
0
Relationships
1
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
649 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a court transcript dated December 10, 2020, where an attorney argues for a client's release. The attorney cites a 2005 opinion by Judge Orenstein in *United States v. Turner* to support the argument that while victims have a right to be heard, this right does not constitute a veto over a defendant's release, especially when conditions can be set to ensure the defendant's appearance in court.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| your Honor | Judge |
Addressed by the speaker in court.
|
| Judge Orenstein | Judge |
Author of an opinion in the Eastern District case United States v. Turner.
|
| Turner | Party in a legal case |
Named in the case United States v. Turner.
|
| Rubin | Party in a legal case |
Named in the case United States v. Rubin.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States | government agency |
Party in the legal cases United States v. Turner and United States v. Rubin.
|
| Eastern District | government agency |
The court district where the cases of United States v. Turner and United States v. Rubin were heard.
|
| Senate | government agency |
Mentioned in reference to its legislative history.
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Listed at the bottom of the page, likely the court reporting service.
|
Timeline (2 events)
2005-04
Judge Orenstein issued an opinion in the case of United States v. Turner.
Eastern District
2020-12-10
A speaker, likely a defense attorney, is arguing for their client's release on conditions, citing legal precedent regarding victims' rights.
Court
your Honor
unnamed speaker (attorney)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
The location of the court that issued opinions in the cited cases.
|
Key Quotes (1)
"In considering how to ensure that the rights are afforded, I am cognizant that the new law gives crime victims a voice but not a veto. Of particular relevance to this case, a court's obligation to protect the victim's rights and to carefully consider any objections that victim may have never requires it to deny a defendant release on conditions that will adequately secure the defendant's appearance,"Source
— Judge Orenstein
(Quoted from an April 2005 opinion in the case United States v. Turner, regarding the balance between victims' rights under the CVRA and a defendant's potential for release.)
DOJ-OGR-00001922.jpg
Quote #1
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,807 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 93 Filed 12/10/20 Page 45 of 91 45
k7e2MaxC kjc
k7e2MaxC kjc
1 377(1), and we understand that the court is following the
2 statute. The statute gives alleged victims the right to speak
3 through counsel, through the government, or directly, and be
4 heard, and we understand that, your Honor.
5 The question today before the court, we submit, is
6 whether or not our client could be released or should be
7 released on a condition or combination of conditions to assure
8 her appearance. And as to that question, the presentations
9 today do not speak, they do not speak to risk of flight, and
10 the courts have -- in this circuit have thought about and
11 researched what weight should be given to that. There is an
12 opinion by Judge Orenstein in the Eastern District, United
13 States v. Turner, from April 2005, not cited by the government,
14 in which the court, after carefully surveying the legislative
15 history and background of the CVRA and its interplay with the
16 bail reform statute, concluded, "In considering how to ensure
17 that the rights are afforded, I am cognizant that the new law
18 gives crime victims a voice but not a veto. Of particular
19 relevance to this case, a court's obligation to protect the
20 victim's rights and to carefully consider any objections that
21 victim may have never requires it to deny a defendant release
22 on conditions that will adequately secure the defendant's
23 appearance," going on to cite the Senate legislative history
24 that's being cited with approval of United States v. Rubin,
25 also an Eastern District case.
2 statute. The statute gives alleged victims the right to speak
3 through counsel, through the government, or directly, and be
4 heard, and we understand that, your Honor.
5 The question today before the court, we submit, is
6 whether or not our client could be released or should be
7 released on a condition or combination of conditions to assure
8 her appearance. And as to that question, the presentations
9 today do not speak, they do not speak to risk of flight, and
10 the courts have -- in this circuit have thought about and
11 researched what weight should be given to that. There is an
12 opinion by Judge Orenstein in the Eastern District, United
13 States v. Turner, from April 2005, not cited by the government,
14 in which the court, after carefully surveying the legislative
15 history and background of the CVRA and its interplay with the
16 bail reform statute, concluded, "In considering how to ensure
17 that the rights are afforded, I am cognizant that the new law
18 gives crime victims a voice but not a veto. Of particular
19 relevance to this case, a court's obligation to protect the
20 victim's rights and to carefully consider any objections that
21 victim may have never requires it to deny a defendant release
22 on conditions that will adequately secure the defendant's
23 appearance," going on to cite the Senate legislative history
24 that's being cited with approval of United States v. Rubin,
25 also an Eastern District case.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00001922
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document