Skip to content
Case File
d-6360Court UnsealedLegal Filing

Court Filing: 122

Date
Unknown
Source
Court Unsealed
Reference
File: 122
Pages
8
Persons
4

Summary

The defendant, Ms. Maxwell, requests that the court dismiss either Count One or Count Three of the superseding indictment as they charge the same offense twice, violating the Double Jeopardy Clause. The counts charge conspiracy to commit a crime against the United States under 18 U.S.C. § 371 with different underlying crimes. The filing applies a multifactor test to determine whether the conspiracies are the same offense.

This document is from the epstein-docs Archive.

View Source Collection
Share
PostReddit

Related Documents (6)

Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

Court Filing: 128

The government responds to the court's order regarding the defendant's proposed redactions to pre-trial motions, agreeing with most redactions while suggesting additional ones to protect ongoing investigations and victim-witnesses' privacy. The letter is part of the United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell case.

2p
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

Court Filing: 170

The document is a letter from the United States Attorney's office to Judge Alison J. Nathan, discussing the proposed redactions to court documents in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The parties have reached an agreement on redactions to Exhibit 11 and the defendant's cover letter. The Government is submitting its omnibus memorandum of law with proposed redactions under seal for the Court's consideration.

2p
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

Court Order: 312

The court orders defense counsel to respond to the government's July 1, 2021 letter motion by July 9, 2021. The order is issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The case involves Ghislaine Maxwell as the defendant.

1p
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

Court Filing: 41165

The document is a court filing in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, where the government responds to the defendant's motion for reconsideration regarding the disclosure of juror names. The court ultimately denies the motion, and the government argues that the defendant has not met the strict standard for reconsideration. The government's response highlights the court's careful crafting of the juror questionnaire and voir dire process to ensure a fair jury is selected.

3p
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

Court Filing: 437

The court revises the schedule for supplemental briefing on two of the defendant's motions in limine and sets the start time for voir dire on November 16, 2021, at 8:30 a.m. The government and defense are given specific deadlines to submit their briefs. The trial is proceeding in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

1p
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

Court Filing: 653

The document is a court filing in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, where the defendant moved for a new trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33, alleging that Juror 50 provided inaccurate information during jury selection. The court conducted a post-trial hearing and ultimately denied the motion, finding that Juror 50's inaccurate answers were not deliberate and that he was not biased.

39p

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.