Jeffries
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
U.S.
|
Legal representative |
7
|
2 | |
|
location
United States
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005-01-01 | Legal case | United States v. Jeffries, 405 F.3d 682 (8th Cir. 2005) | 8th Cir. | View |
| 2005-01-01 | Legal case | U.S. v. Jeffries, 405 F.3d 682 | Eighth Circuit | View |
DOJ-OGR-00021057.jpg
This document is page 'ix' from a legal filing, specifically Document 59 in Case 22-1426, dated February 28, 2023. It serves as a table of authorities, listing numerous U.S. court cases with their legal citations and corresponding page references within the larger document. The cases cited span from 1926 to 2017 and originate from various federal district and circuit courts.
DOJ-OGR-00021655.jpg
This document is page vii from a legal filing in Case 22-1426, dated June 29, 2023. It serves as a table of authorities, listing various legal cases with the United States as the plaintiff. Each entry includes the case name, its legal citation (including the court and year), and the corresponding page numbers where it is referenced within the main document.
DOJ-OGR-00021123.jpg
This legal document discusses the retroactive application of statutes of limitations, referencing several court cases and judicial opinions. It highlights a shift in interpretation, particularly noting Judge Cabranes's view in Enterprise that such statutes may have impermissible retroactive effects. The document also points out a tension between the Eighth and Ninth Circuits' reasoning and the Third Circuit's stance on the retroactivity of §3283.
DOJ-OGR-00002995.jpg
This legal document, a page from a court filing, presents an argument regarding the Ex Post Facto Clause and statutes of limitations. The author argues that it is constitutionally permissible for Congress to retroactively extend a limitations period for prosecutions that are not yet time-barred, citing numerous legal precedents like Falter v. United States and Stogner v. California. The document concludes that applying Section 3283 retroactively in this case is lawful and dismisses the defendant's contrary assertion.
DOJ-OGR-00002989.jpg
This legal document argues that the 2003 amendment to the federal statute of limitations for child sexual abuse (18 U.S.C. § 3283) was expressly intended by Congress to apply retroactively to pre-enactment conduct. The document supports this claim by analyzing the text of the statute and citing legal precedent from the Second, Eighth, and Ninth Circuits, which have held that Congress intended to extend the time to bring charges for live claims.
DOJ-OGR-00002987.jpg
This document is page 53 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on April 16, 2021. It presents legal arguments regarding the statute of limitations for sex crimes involving minors, specifically arguing that the 2003 amendment to 18 U.S.C. § 3283 applies retroactively to crimes committed between 1994 and 1997. The text cites relevant case law (US v. Leo Sure Chief, US v. Jeffries) to support the position that the indictment is timely because the victims are still alive.
DOJ-OGR-00002951.jpg
This document is page xvi from a legal filing in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on April 16, 2021. It serves as a table of authorities, listing numerous 'United States v.' court cases with defendants ranging from Israel to Laurenti. Each entry provides the legal citation for the case and the page numbers where it is referenced within the main document.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity