Event Details
April 26, 2021
Description
Oral argument on bail appeal
Participants (2)
| Name | Type | Mentions | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ms. Maxwell's counsel | person | 6 | View Entity |
| Second Circuit | organization | 869 | View Entity |
Source Documents (1)
DOJ-OGR-00002931.jpg
This is page 7 of a legal filing by the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim dated April 15, 2021, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues for a continuance (delay) of the trial due to a second superseding indictment which doubles Maxwell's sentencing exposure, while noting that continued detention prejudices the defendant. It also mentions an upcoming bail appeal hearing at the Second Circuit scheduled for April 26th.
Related Events
Events with shared participants
Discussion and interpretation of the application of § 3283 statute of limitations, referencing Supreme Court and Circuit Court precedents regarding war frauds and child sex abuse statutes.
Date unknown
The Second Circuit issued a writ of mandamus in 'In re U.S.', reversing a District Court's order that directed the Government to produce oral statements from defendants and coconspirators.
1987-01-01
The case United States v. King, where the Second Circuit upheld sealing parts of the record based on jurors' privacy interests.
Date unknown • United States
The Second Circuit denied Maxwell’s petition for rehearing.
2024-11-25
In the Palmieri case, the Second Circuit reversed a district court's decision to grant the state Attorney General's motion to modify sealing orders.
Date unknown
Ms. Maxwell's counsel received and reviewed voluminous discovery (over 2.7 million pages) produced by the government.
Date unknown
The Second Circuit held in *Vernon v. Cassadaga Valley Cent. School Dist.* that a new statute shortening the filing period for a civil claim applied retroactively.
Date unknown
The Second Circuit held in *In re Enterprise Mortgage Acceptance Co.* that applying an extended statute of limitations to revive previously time-barred claims had impermissible retroactive effects.
2004-01-01
In *Weingarten*, the Second Circuit considered, but did not ultimately reach, the issue of whether Section 3283 applies retroactively.
Date unknown
The Second Circuit rejected the defendant's reasoning in the Bahna case and upheld the conviction.
1995-01-01
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein event