DOJ-OGR-00000003.jpg
696 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
4
Organizations
2
Locations
3
Events
1
Relationships
1
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
696 KB
Summary
This legal document is a court opinion dated September 17, 2024, regarding the appeal of Ghislaine Maxwell's June 29, 2022, conviction. The document outlines the five legal questions Maxwell raised on appeal, including issues related to Jeffrey Epstein's non-prosecution agreement, the statute of limitations, and jury conduct. The appellate court found no errors in the District Court's proceedings and affirmed Maxwell's conviction and sentence.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ghislaine Maxwell | Defendant |
The defendant appealing her June 29, 2022, judgment of conviction.
|
| Alison J. Nathan | Judge |
The judge in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York who presided over Maxwell's case.
|
| Jeffrey Epstein |
Mentioned in relation to a Non-Prosecution Agreement that Maxwell argued barred her prosecution.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States District Court for the Southern District of New York | government agency |
The court where Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted.
|
| United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida | government agency |
The office that had a Non-Prosecution Agreement with Jeffrey Epstein.
|
| United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York | government agency |
The office that prosecuted Ghislaine Maxwell.
|
| District Court | government agency |
Referred to throughout the document as the court that conducted the trial and made the rulings being appealed.
|
Timeline (3 events)
2021-03-29
A second superseding indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell was issued.
Southern District of New York
2022-06-29
Judgment of conviction for Ghislaine Maxwell.
Southern District of New York
2024-09-17
Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal of her conviction is decided, affirming the lower court's judgment.
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
The location of the United States District Court where Maxwell was convicted and prosecuted.
|
|
|
The location of the United States Attorney's Office that had a Non-Prosecution Agreement with Jeffrey Epstein.
|
Relationships (1)
Maxwell's appeal was based in part on a Non-Prosecution Agreement Jeffrey Epstein had with the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida, which she argued should have barred her own prosecution.
Key Quotes (1)
"Identifying no errors in the District Court’s conduct of this complex case, we AFFIRM the District Court’s June 29, 2022, judgment of conviction."Source
— The appellate court
(The concluding statement of the document, explaining the court's decision to uphold Maxwell's conviction.)
DOJ-OGR-00000003.jpg
Quote #1
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,716 characters)
Case 22-1426, Document 109-1, 09/17/2024, 3634097, Page2 of 26
Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell appeals her June 29, 2022, judgment of conviction in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Alison J. Nathan, Judge). Maxwell was convicted of conspiracy to transport minors with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371; transportation of a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a); and sex trafficking of a minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591(a) and (b)(2). She was principally sentenced to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 60 months, 120 months, and 240 months, respectively, to be followed by concurrent terms of supervised release.
On appeal, the questions presented are whether (1) Jeffrey Epstein’s Non-Prosecution Agreement with the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida barred Maxwell’s prosecution by the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York; (2) a second superseding indictment of March 29, 2021, complied with the statute of limitations; (3) the District Court abused its discretion in denying Maxwell’s Rule 33 motion for a new trial based on the claimed violation of her Sixth Amendment right to a fair and impartial jury; (4) the District Court’s response to a jury note resulted in a constructive amendment of, or prejudicial variance from, the allegations in the second superseding indictment; and (5) Maxwell’s sentence was procedurally reasonable.
Identifying no errors in the District Court’s conduct of this complex case, we AFFIRM the District Court’s June 29, 2022, judgment of conviction.
2
DOJ-OGR-00000003
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document