This document is a page from a legal filing that critiques the reasoning of a prior court decision, 'Annabi'. The author argues that 'Annabi' departed from the established legal doctrine that a plea agreement with a specific U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO) only binds that office, not the entire U.S. government, unless explicitly stated otherwise. The text cites numerous other cases in its footnotes to support this traditional, more limited interpretation of such agreements.
Page 24 (PDF page 37) of a legal brief in Case 22-1426 (United States v. Maxwell appeal). The text argues against Maxwell's claim that Eleventh Circuit law should apply to the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), asserting that the court should follow its own precedents (Annabi) and that the governing law is that of the forum state. It cites multiple cases to support the application of local circuit law over the law where a plea agreement was originally negotiated.
This document is page 122 of a rough draft transcript from a legal deposition, likely related to a House Oversight investigation. Attorney Mr. Simpson questions a witness (a former prosecutor from the Eastern District of Virginia) about the admissibility of a third party's Fifth Amendment invocation as evidence in criminal versus civil cases. Mr. Scarola is also present as counsel. The witness discusses their experience with approximately 20 trials involving drug dealers and gun runners but cannot recall specific instances of using the Fifth Amendment in the manner described.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity