| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
location
United States
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Miller
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2002-01-01 | Legal case | United States v. Greer, 285 F.3d 158 (2d Cir. 2002) | 2d Cir. | View |
| 2002-01-01 | Court decision | Decision in the case United States v. Greer. | 2d Cir. | View |
| 2002-01-01 | Legal case | United States v. Greer, 285 F.3d 158 | U.S. Court of Appeals for t... | View |
This document is page 7 of 239 (internally numbered 'vi') from a legal filing, Document 204 in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on April 16, 2021. It is a table of cases, listing legal precedents with their citations and the page numbers where they are referenced in the main document. The footer includes a Department of Justice document identifier, DOJ-OGR-00002941.
This document is page 12 of a legal filing (Document 342) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on October 13, 2021. The text presents a legal argument advocating for attorney-conducted voir dire (jury selection questioning), citing that attorneys possess more in-depth knowledge of the case nuances than the presiding judge. It references legal precedents from the Fifth Circuit and scholarly articles to support the claim that counsel must be allowed to probe jurors for hidden prejudices.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity