DOJ-OGR-00021085.jpg
922 KB
Extraction Summary
14
People
8
Organizations
4
Locations
0
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal brief / court filing (appellate brief)
File Size:
922 KB
Summary
This document is page 38 of a legal brief (Case 22-1426, dated Feb 28, 2023) filed in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. It contains legal arguments attempting to distance the current case from the precedent set in *U.S. v. Annabi*, arguing that *Annabi* is an outlier regarding whether a plea agreement in one district binds another. The text consists primarily of extensive footnotes citing various Second Circuit decisions (*Prisco*, *Ashraf*, *Salameh*, etc.) that limited plea agreements to specific US Attorney's Offices, supporting the government's position against the Appellant (identified by case number as Ghislaine Maxwell).
People (14)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Appellant | Party to the case |
The individual appealing the case (Case 22-1426 corresponds to Ghislaine Maxwell), arguing that the 'Annabi' case pre...
|
| Annabi | Subject of Case Law |
Refers to U.S. v. Annabi, a legal precedent regarding whether a plea agreement in one district binds another.
|
| Prisco | Defendant in cited case |
Cited in U.S. v. Prisco regarding plea agreement limitations.
|
| Ashraf | Defendant in cited case |
Cited in U.S. v. Ashraf regarding plea agreement limitations.
|
| Gonzales | Defendant in cited case |
Cited in U.S. v. Gonzales regarding plea agreement limitations.
|
| Salameh | Defendant in cited case |
Cited in U.S. v. Salameh regarding plea agreement limitations.
|
| Russo | Defendant in cited case |
Cited in U.S. v. Russo regarding plea agreement binding.
|
| Persico | Defendant in cited case |
Cited in U.S. v. Persico regarding plea agreement binding.
|
| Reiter | Defendant in cited case |
Cited in U.S. v. Reiter regarding double jeopardy.
|
| Rivera | Defendant in cited case |
Cited in U.S. v. Rivera regarding plea agreements.
|
| Nersesian | Defendant in cited case |
Cited in U.S. v. Nersesian.
|
| Brown | Defendant in cited case |
Cited in U.S. v. Brown.
|
| Egbert | Party in cited case |
Cited in Egbert v. Boule.
|
| Boule | Party in cited case |
Cited in Egbert v. Boule.
|
Organizations (8)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States Attorney's Office (USAO) |
Generally referenced regarding binding agreements between districts.
|
|
| United States Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey |
Cited in Prisco case.
|
|
| United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia |
Cited in Ashraf case.
|
|
| United States Attorney’s Office for the District of New Mexico |
Cited in Gonzales case.
|
|
| United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York |
Cited in Salameh case.
|
|
| Southern District of New York |
Referenced in Russo and Persico cases.
|
|
| Department of Justice (DOJ) |
Indicated by footer 'DOJ-OGR'.
|
|
| 2d Circuit Court of Appeals |
The court issuing the cited opinions (2d Cir.).
|
Locations (4)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
District mentioned in Prisco case.
|
|
|
Eastern District mentioned in Ashraf case.
|
|
|
District mentioned in Gonzales case.
|
|
|
Eastern and Southern Districts mentioned in various citations.
|
Key Quotes (3)
"Annabi is an island of a case—without friends in other circuits, or this one."Source
DOJ-OGR-00021085.jpg
Quote #1
"Appellant preserves her argument that Annabi should be overruled or abrogated."Source
DOJ-OGR-00021085.jpg
Quote #2
"Annabi’s analytical faults counsel strongly against extending it to new facts or contexts."Source
DOJ-OGR-00021085.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,343 characters)
Case 22-1426, Document 59, 02/28/2023, 3475902, Page38 of 113
agreements, which do not require resort to Annabi’s canon of construction),4 or for
points unrelated to whether an agreement with one USAO will bind another,5 or—
in one case—in an unpublished decision that provided too little information to
clarify whether the plea agreement as a whole was ambiguous.6 Annabi is an
island of a case—without friends in other circuits, or this one.
points unrelated to whether an agreement with one USAO will bind another,5 or—
in one case—in an unpublished decision that provided too little information to
clarify whether the plea agreement as a whole was ambiguous.6 Annabi is an
island of a case—without friends in other circuits, or this one.
Annabi’s analytical faults7 counsel strongly against extending it to new facts
or contexts. Cf. Egbert v. Boule, 142 S.Ct. 1793, 1803 (2022) (where underlying
or contexts. Cf. Egbert v. Boule, 142 S.Ct. 1793, 1803 (2022) (where underlying
4 See U.S. v. Prisco, 391 F. App’x 920, 921 (2d Cir. Sept. 2, 2010) (agreement
stated it was “limited to the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of New
Jersey and cannot bind other federal, state, or local authorities”); U.S. v. Ashraf,
320 F. App’x 26, 28 (2d Cir. Apr. 6, 2009) (agreement, “by its express terms,
bound only the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia”); U.S. v.
Gonzales, 93 F. App’x 268, 271 (2d Cir. Mar. 24, 2004) (agreement “explicitly
states that the agreement binds only the United States Attorney’s Office for the
District of New Mexico”); U.S. v. Salameh, 152 F.3d 88, 119, 120 (2d Cir. 1998)
(“[T]his agreement is limited to the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern
District of New York and cannot bind other federal, state or local prosecuting
authorities.”); U.S. v. Russo, 801 F.2d 624, 626 (2d Cir. 1986) (“[W]e need not
resolve the question whether the Southern District is bound by this particular plea
agreement….”); U.S. v. Persico, 774 F.2d 30 (2d Cir. 1985), aff’g 620 F.Supp.
836, 846 (S.D.N.Y. 1985) (“Persico’s plea agreement explicitly states that it ‘is
binding on the United States only in [the Eastern] district’”) (brackets in original).
stated it was “limited to the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of New
Jersey and cannot bind other federal, state, or local authorities”); U.S. v. Ashraf,
320 F. App’x 26, 28 (2d Cir. Apr. 6, 2009) (agreement, “by its express terms,
bound only the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia”); U.S. v.
Gonzales, 93 F. App’x 268, 271 (2d Cir. Mar. 24, 2004) (agreement “explicitly
states that the agreement binds only the United States Attorney’s Office for the
District of New Mexico”); U.S. v. Salameh, 152 F.3d 88, 119, 120 (2d Cir. 1998)
(“[T]his agreement is limited to the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern
District of New York and cannot bind other federal, state or local prosecuting
authorities.”); U.S. v. Russo, 801 F.2d 624, 626 (2d Cir. 1986) (“[W]e need not
resolve the question whether the Southern District is bound by this particular plea
agreement….”); U.S. v. Persico, 774 F.2d 30 (2d Cir. 1985), aff’g 620 F.Supp.
836, 846 (S.D.N.Y. 1985) (“Persico’s plea agreement explicitly states that it ‘is
binding on the United States only in [the Eastern] district’”) (brackets in original).
5 See U.S. v. Reiter, 848 F.2d 336, 340 (2d Cir. 1988) (discussing double jeopardy
issue); U.S. v. Rivera, 844 F.2d 916, 923 (2d Cir. 1988) (plea agreement and later
charges arose in the same district, unlike Annabi); U.S. v. Nersesian, 824 F.2d
1294, 1321-22 (2d Cir. 1987) (case related to Annabi itself).
issue); U.S. v. Rivera, 844 F.2d 916, 923 (2d Cir. 1988) (plea agreement and later
charges arose in the same district, unlike Annabi); U.S. v. Nersesian, 824 F.2d
1294, 1321-22 (2d Cir. 1987) (case related to Annabi itself).
6 See U.S. v. Brown, Nos. 99-1230(L), 99-1762, 2002 WL 34244994, at *2 (2d Cir.
Apr. 26, 2002).
Apr. 26, 2002).
7 Appellant preserves her argument that Annabi should be overruled or abrogated.
23
DOJ-OGR-00021085
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document