UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
CABRANES
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
WESLEY
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
LOHIER
|
Professional |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-04-27 | Court ruling | The Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's orders and denied Ghislaine Maxwell's motion f... | United States Court of Appe... | View |
| 2021-04-27 | Court ruling | The Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's orders and denied Ghislaine Maxwell's motion f... | United States Court of Appe... | View |
| 2021-04-01 | Legal notice | Issuance of a 'NOTICE OF DEFECTIVE FILING' regarding the submitted 'Notice of Appearance as Addit... | United States Court of Appe... | View |
| 2021-04-01 | Legal notice | The Court issued a Notice of Defective Filing for the motion for bail. | United States Court of Appe... | View |
| 2021-04-01 | Legal notice issuance | Issuance of a 'NOTICE OF DEFECTIVE FILING' by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second C... | Thurgood Marshall U.S. Cour... | View |
| 2020-10-19 | Court ruling | The appeal by Defendant-Appellant Maxwell was dismissed, and the motion to consolidate was denied... | N/A | View |
| 2020-10-19 | Court ruling | The court dismissed the appeal of Defendant-Appellant Maxwell and denied the motion to consolidat... | N/A | View |
| 2020-09-28 | Court order | The court granted the appellant's (Ghislaine Maxwell) motion to file three documents under seal: ... | United States Court of Appe... | View |
| 2019-08-05 | Legal notice | The Court issued a Notice of Defective Filing because the submitted document was not text-searcha... | United States Court of Appe... | View |
DOJ-OGR-00001318.jpg
This document is a legal affirmation filed on April 12, 2021, by Assistant U.S. Attorney Lara Pomerantz to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The filing formally opposes the appeal made by Defendant-Appellant Ghislaine Maxwell regarding two prior District Court orders, dated December 28, 2020, and March 22, 2021, which denied her requests for pre-trial release.
DOJ-OGR-00001316.jpg
This document is an Affirmation filed on April 12, 2021, by Assistant US Attorney Lara Pomerantz in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Pomerantz requests permission to file an unredacted copy of 'Exhibit F' (Government's Memorandum in Opposition to Release) under seal. She notes that the public version was redacted to protect third-party privacy interests and confidential discovery material, but the Government believes the unredacted information is pertinent to the appeal.
DOJ-OGR-00001310.jpg
This document is a 'Notice of Defective Filing' issued by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on April 5, 2021, regarding the case United States of America v. Maxwell (Docket 21-58). The notice indicates that a 'Notice of Appearance as Additional Counsel' submitted by the United States (Appellee) did not comply with Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (FRAP) or Local Rules, though the specific reason is not checked in the visible list. The document lists Judge Debra Ann Livingston and Clerk Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe as court officials.
DOJ-OGR-00001258.jpg
This page from a legal filing (March 23, 2021) argues for Ghislaine Maxwell's release on bail. The defense contends that Maxwell's offer to renounce her French citizenship is a valid condition of release, countering a letter from the French Ministry of Justice which claimed such renunciation wouldn't change extradition rules. The defense relies on an opinion by French counsel William Julié to argue the government's interpretation of French law is incorrect.
DOJ-OGR-00000950.jpg
This legal document is a portion of a court filing, likely a memorandum from the prosecution ('the Government'), arguing for the pre-trial detention of a defendant. The document cites U.S. legal code, specifically 18 U.S.C. § 3142, to assert that the defendant is an extreme flight risk and that a statutory presumption for detention applies due to the alleged offenses involving the sexual exploitation of minors. The argument focuses on the nature of the offense and the strength of the evidence as factors weighing in favor of detention.
DOJ-OGR-00000942.jpg
This document is the cover page for a legal filing dated April 1, 2021, submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. It is an appendix to a motion for pretrial release for the appellant, Ghislaine Maxwell, in her appeal against the United States of America. The filing was prepared by attorney David Oscar Markus of the law firm MARKUS/MOSS PLLC.
DOJ-OGR-00000912.jpg
This document is the cover page for a legal filing, specifically 'Appellant Ghislaine Maxwell's Motion for Pretrial Release', submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on April 1, 2021. The motion is part of an appeal from a case in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, in the matter of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The filing was made by attorney David Oscar Markus of the Miami-based law firm MARKUS/MOSS PLLC.
DOJ-OGR-00000906.jpg
This document is a 'Notice of Defective Filing' issued by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on April 1, 2021. It addresses a 'Notice of Appearance as Additional Counsel' submitted on behalf of Appellant Ghislaine Maxwell, which failed to comply with court rules, specifically being 'Not Text-Searchable'. The notice lists various reasons for non-compliance with FRAP and Local Rules.
DOJ-OGR-00000904.jpg
This is a Notice of Defective Filing from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding United States of America v. Maxwell (Case 21-770). Dated April 1, 2021, it notifies the defense that a 'Notice of Appearance as Substitute Counsel' submitted on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell on March 30, 2021, did not comply with Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (FRAP) or Local Rules. The document lists various potential reasons for the defect, though no specific reason is visually checked on this page.
DOJ-OGR-00000840.jpg
This document is a Notice of Appeal filed on March 24, 2021, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of defendant Ghislaine Maxwell. The appeal challenges a court order from March 22, 2021, which denied her 'Third Motion for Release on Bail'. The document identifies Maxwell's attorney, David Oscar Markus, and the prosecuting Assistant U.S. Attorneys.
DOJ-OGR-00000838.jpg
This is a Docketing Notice from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding the case United States of America v. Maxwell (Case 21-770), dated March 29, 2021. It notifies counsel that the appeal has been docketed and provides instructions regarding the Acknowledgment and Notice of Appearance Form, which must be returned within 14 days. The document references the lower court case (1:20-cr-330-1) presided over by Judge Nathan in the SDNY.
DOJ-OGR-00000837.jpg
This document is a mandate from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, dated August 21, 2019, in the case of United States of America v. Jeffrey Epstein. The court officially orders the withdrawal of Epstein's appeal, based on a stipulation filed by both parties. The order was signed by Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, the Clerk of Court.
DOJ-OGR-00000835.jpg
This document is a formal Notice of Case Manager Change from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding the case United States of America v. Epstein, dated August 21, 2019. It lists Judge Berman as the District Court Judge and provides a phone number for inquiries.
DOJ-OGR-00000830.jpg
This is a "Notice of Defective Filing" issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on August 5, 2019, in the case of United States of America v. Epstein. The notice states that a filing for additional counsel, submitted on behalf of the appellant, was rejected because the document was not text-searchable, which violates Local Rules 25.1 and 25.2. The document identifies the case docket numbers and the presiding judges for both the appellate and district courts.
DOJ-OGR-00000829.jpg
This is a legal form filed on August 5, 2019, with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit for the criminal case 'United States of America v. Jeffrey Epstein' (Docket 19-2221). The form was completed by Epstein's attorney, Reid Weingarten of Steptoe & Johnson LLP, to state that he is not ordering a court transcript. The reason provided is that a 'Daily copy' is already available.
DOJ-OGR-00000817.jpg
This document is a legal notice from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, dated July 23, 2019, confirming the filing of the "Record on Appeal - Electronic Index" for the case of United States of America v. Epstein (Docket # 19-2221). The notice identifies the key court officials, including Chief Judge Robert A. Katzmann and Clerk of Court Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, and provides details of the original District Court case.
DOJ-OGR-00000631.jpg
This document is a Mandate from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, issued on August 21, 2019. It orders the withdrawal of Jeffrey Epstein's appeal (Docket No. 19-2221) following a stipulation filed by the parties pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure (FRAP) 42. The document is signed by the Clerk of Court, Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe.
DOJ-OGR-00000509.jpg
This document is a formal Notice of Appeal filed on July 22, 2019, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. On behalf of defendant Jeffrey Epstein, his counsel Reid Weingarten is appealing a 'Decision & Order Remanding Defendant' that was issued by Judge Richard M. Berman on July 18, 2019. The appeal is directed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
DOJ-OGR-00000010.jpg
This document is page 9 of a legal filing (Case 22-1426) dated September 17, 2024, discussing Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal. The court affirms that the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) between Jeffrey Epstein and the Southern District of Florida (USAO-SDFL) does not prevent the Southern District of New York (USAO-SDNY) from prosecuting Maxwell. The text references a $750,000 fine imposed on Maxwell and cites legal precedent establishing that plea agreements generally only bind the specific district office where they are entered.
DOJ-OGR-00000002.jpg
This is the title page of a decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding the case United States v. Maxwell (Case No. 22-1426-cr). The document indicates that Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal was argued on March 12, 2024, and decided on September 17, 2024, by judges Cabranes, Wesley, and Lohier.
DOJ-OGR-00021048.jpg
This document is the cover page of a legal filing, specifically a 'BRIEF AND SPECIAL APPENDIX FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT', submitted to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on February 28, 2023. The filing is for the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 22-1426-cr), where Maxwell is the Defendant-Appellant. The document lists her legal representation from the law firm Aidala, Bertuna & Kamins PC.
DOJ-OGR-00021046.jpg
This document is a formal Notice of Appeal filed on July 7, 2022, on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell. The notice, submitted by her counsel Bobbi C. Sternheim, indicates Maxwell's intent to appeal her conviction and sentence, which were officially entered on June 29, 2022, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The appeal is directed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
DOJ-OGR-00021043.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (likely a sentencing hearing for Ghislaine Maxwell) where the judge is ruling on sentencing guidelines. The judge overrules an objection, finding by a preponderance of evidence that the defendant supervised Sarah Kellen, who is identified as a 'knowing participant in the criminal conspiracy.' The ruling cites testimony from Larry Visoski, David Rodgers, and Carolyn, as well as flight records and a household manual, to establish the defendant's leadership role as 'Epstein's number two.'
DOJ-OGR-00021021.jpg
This document is a page from a court order (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on April 29, 2022, denying Ghislaine Maxwell's renewed motion regarding pre-indictment delay. The Court ruled that the Defendant failed to prove the Government intentionally delayed the indictment to gain a tactical advantage or that the delay caused actual prejudice to her defense. The text notes that trial testimony provided legitimate explanations for the timing of the indictment.
DOJ-OGR-00021005.jpg
This document is page 22 of a court order (Document 657) filed on April 29, 2022, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The page outlines the 'Applicable Law' regarding the Fifth Amendment's Grand Jury Clause and 'prejudicial variance' or 'constructive amendment' of an indictment. It cites various legal precedents (Second Circuit cases) to define the standards for determining if a defendant was convicted of a crime different from the one charged in the indictment. The Court denies the Defendant's motion on this basis.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity