DOJ-OGR-00000060.tif
35.2 KB
Extraction Summary
1
People
4
Organizations
3
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document / report excerpt
File Size:
35.2 KB
Summary
This document excerpt discusses legal interpretations regarding a non-prosecution agreement (NPA) and the jurisdiction of United States Attorneys. It criticizes the Second Circuit's reliance on a selective reading of legal texts and highlights that the NPA was intended to resolve Epstein's state and federal criminal liability broadly, serving the interests of the United States and the State of Florida, not just a specific district.
People (1)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Epstein | Defendant |
Sought to resolve globally his state and federal criminal liability
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| OPR |
Report mentioned
|
|
| Second Circuit |
Court that misplaced reliance on Judiciary Act and U.S. Attorneys' Manual
|
|
| United States Attorneys |
Subject of discussion regarding jurisdiction and non-prosecution agreements
|
|
| U.S. Dept. of Justice |
Publisher of the Justice Manual
|
Timeline (1 events)
Non-prosecution agreement (NPA) intended for broad, complete resolution of matters, including Epstein's state and federal criminal liability, serving the interests of the United States, the State of Florida, and the Defendant.
Locations (3)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Specific district mentioned in relation to jurisdiction and interests
|
|
|
Broader jurisdiction and entity whose interests are served
|
|
|
State whose interests are served
|
Relationships (2)
NPA states 'Epstein seeks to resolve globally his state and federal criminal liability.' and 'the interests of the United States... will be served'.
NPA states 'Epstein seeks to resolve globally his state and federal criminal liability.' and 'the interests of the ...State of Florida... will be served'.
Key Quotes (3)
"United States Attorneys are "cabined to their specific district unless otherwise directed.""Source
DOJ-OGR-00000060.tif
Quote #1
""Epstein seeks to resolve globally his state and federal criminal liability.""Source
DOJ-OGR-00000060.tif
Quote #2
""the interests of the United States, the State of Florida, and the Defendant will be served""Source
DOJ-OGR-00000060.tif
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,510 characters)
18
OPR report, precludes application of Annabi in this
case because the intent to bind the United States as a
whole, and not just the Southern District of Florida, is
clear.
Third, the Second Circuit misplaced its reliance on
a selective reading of the Judiciary Act of 1789 and the
United States Attorneys' Manual to conclude that
United States Attorneys are "cabined to their specific
district unless otherwise directed." 118 F.4th at 265.
Yet the Second Circuit ignored the Manual's admoni-
tion that United States Attorneys who do not wish to
bind other districts should explicitly limit the scope of
a non-prosecution agreement to their districts. U.S.
Dept. of Justice, Justice Manual (updated Feb. 2018),
https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-27000-principles-fede
ral-prosecution. The existence of this provision reveals
that AUSAs can bind other districts and that it is the
obligation of the government to make explicit any
limitation in the scope of immunity, and not the other
way around.
Fourth, the recitals of the NPA reveal that the
intent was for a broad, complete resolution of the
matters addressed by the agreement. The NPA states
that "Epstein seeks to resolve globally his state and
federal criminal liability." (App.25). It also states that
"the interests of the United States, the State of Florida,
and the Defendant will be served" by the agreement.
(App.25-26, emphasis added). The recitals do not refer
to the specific interests of the Southern District of
Florida at all.
DOJ-OGR-00000060
OPR report, precludes application of Annabi in this
case because the intent to bind the United States as a
whole, and not just the Southern District of Florida, is
clear.
Third, the Second Circuit misplaced its reliance on
a selective reading of the Judiciary Act of 1789 and the
United States Attorneys' Manual to conclude that
United States Attorneys are "cabined to their specific
district unless otherwise directed." 118 F.4th at 265.
Yet the Second Circuit ignored the Manual's admoni-
tion that United States Attorneys who do not wish to
bind other districts should explicitly limit the scope of
a non-prosecution agreement to their districts. U.S.
Dept. of Justice, Justice Manual (updated Feb. 2018),
https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-27000-principles-fede
ral-prosecution. The existence of this provision reveals
that AUSAs can bind other districts and that it is the
obligation of the government to make explicit any
limitation in the scope of immunity, and not the other
way around.
Fourth, the recitals of the NPA reveal that the
intent was for a broad, complete resolution of the
matters addressed by the agreement. The NPA states
that "Epstein seeks to resolve globally his state and
federal criminal liability." (App.25). It also states that
"the interests of the United States, the State of Florida,
and the Defendant will be served" by the agreement.
(App.25-26, emphasis added). The recitals do not refer
to the specific interests of the Southern District of
Florida at all.
DOJ-OGR-00000060
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document