Browse by Document Type
Legal (11,650 documents)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 122 of 239
The defendant asks the Court for a drastic remedy, namely suppression of a// evidence the
Government obtained pursuant to the subp
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 123 of 239
3. The Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence Obtained Pursuant to
the Subpoena Under the Fifth Amendment Is Without Merit
The d
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 117 of 239
The defendant repeatedly argues that the Government’s failure to mention AUSA-1’s prior
contact with Boies Schiller in 2016 was a
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 118 of 239
was a protective order that would govern at least some of the materials, and that is why we
ultimately made the application to the
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 120 of 239
considered the Government’s application and then issued a lengthy opinion ruling on that
application, the Government was entirely
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 115 of 239
establish that a law enforcement officer has acted in good faith in conducting the search.” /d.
(internal quotation marks and cita
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 114 of 239
omitted)). “As the rule seeks to deter future Fourth Amendment violations, the Supreme Court
advises district courts to only suppr
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 112 of 239
marks omitted) (emphasis added)); In re “Agent Orange” Prod. Liab. Litig., 821 F.2d at 145 (“It
is undisputed that a district cour
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 111 of 239
ii. Discussion
Maxwell cannot assert a Fourth Amendment claim because she had no legitimate
expectation of privacy in the deposit
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 108 of 239
way circumvented Martindell; rather, the Government sought court approval to enforce a subpoena
and then followed the directives i
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 109 of 239
De Maxwell’s Fourth Amendment Claim Fails
Maxwell’s Fourth Amendment motion is premised on a wholly unsupported expansion of
the
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 107 of 239
public interest” which resulted in the Government convening a grand jury to investigate a serious
crime. (Def. Mot. 3, Ex. G at 22
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 106 of 239
supervision of a judge, the longstanding principle that ‘the public . . . has a right to every man’s
evidence,’ except for those p
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 105 of 239
information protected thereunder, it was error for the district court to modify the magistrate’s
orders”).
At the same time, in M
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 104 of 239
“Agent Orange” Prod. Liab. Litig., 821 F.2d 139, 147 (2d Cir. 1987); see also Andover Data
Servs., a Div. of Players Computer, Inc
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 103 of 239
ce
committed perjury.” According to two anonymous sources, “a second meeting occurred.”
However, the Article cites another anonym
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 100 of 239
on which Maxwell or anyone else might reasonably have relied is that Giuffre or her lawyers would
not do what the defendant in Che
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 98 of 239
Bank, of course, as noted above, the subpoena recipient produced materials to a prosecutor in
direct violation of the relevant prot
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 97 of 239
of the materials in light of the “extraordinary protections” of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedue
6(e). Ud. at 17-18).
Finally, Ch
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 96 of 239
Martindell was applicable. (/d. at 3). She stated that were the Government’s application disclosed
to the parties, “Maxwell would p
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 94 of 239
requested the same relating to Jane Doe 43 v. Epstein, et al., 17 Civ. 0616 (JGK) (SN). Because
of the ongoing and covert nature of
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 93 of 239
from that meeting. On or about December 6, 2018, AUSA-1 provided the prosecutors with her
notes from the February 2016 meeting (whi
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 88 of 239
A. Factual Background
The defendant’s motion is, at its core, premised on a false factual narrative. The defendant
alleges, based
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 87 of 239
motions, the suppression motions overlap in fact and argument, and accordingly, the Government
responds to both motions in this sec
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 86 of 239
manufactured any alleged delay to gain a tactical advantage over her. She has “offered no credible
evidence to suggest that the Gov
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 85 of 239
particular, this matter appears to be the only remaining active civil case in this District in which
claims against Ghislaine Maxwe
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 83 of 239
satisfied that he should prosecute and will be able promptly to establish guilt beyond a reasonable
doubt.” (internal quotation mar
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 82 of 239
(Minor Victim-1 and Minor Victim-3) for the first time. In particular, Minor Victim-1 first agreed
to be interviewed in September 2
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 79 of 239
B. The Defendant Has Failed to Establish That the Government Delayed the
Indictment for An Improper Purpose
1. Applicable Law
If,
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 81 of 239
ee Discussion
Even if the defendant could establish any actual prejudice—which she cannot—such
prejudice would be “necessary but n
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 80 of 239
The Second Circuit has clearly held that a defendant seeking the dismissal of an indictment
filed within the statute of limitations
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 77 of 239
to the extent the passage of time affects the memories of witnesses who testify at trial, the
defendant will have an opportunity to
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 76 of 239
death.!’ As such, it is neither surprising nor terribly probative of any issue in dispute in this case
that Detective Recarey might
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 75 of 239
crimes or events. See, e.g., United States v. Scarpa, 897 F.2d 63, 70 (2d Cir. 1990) (“A defendant
may not seek to establish h[er]
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 72 of 239
United States v. Long, 697 F. Supp. 651, 657 (S.D.N.Y. 1988). The defendant has not made such
a showing. Her speculative assertions
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 71 of 239
would have found the witness credible” (citations omitted)). “Courts have held that ‘the defendant
also has the burden of showing t
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 70 of 239
Ricco, 549 F.2d 264, 272 (2d Cir. 1977). The burden is so heavy that it is rarely met by a defendant.
See DeMichele v. Greenburgh C
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 6/7 of 239
‘Involving’ . . . is equally consistent with applying a fact-based approach.” 865 F.3d at 60 n.11
(citing Nijhawan v. Holder, 557
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 69 of 239
can use to carry her heavy burden. Without proof of actual prejudice, the motion fails. Second,
even if the Court finds actual prej
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 63 of 239
Toussie to the Landgraf analysis, see United States v. Gentile, 235 F. Supp. 3d 649, 655 (D.N.J.
2017), and that case, which did no
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 62 of 239
Facto Clause and Landgraf’s second step.”). Maxwell cites no precedent for the proposition that,
in the criminal context, much less
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 61 of 239
much violence is done to our instinctive feelings of justice and fair
play. For the state to assure a man that he has become safe
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 58 of 239
the resurrection of time-barred prosecutions, in violation of the Ex Post Facto Clause.'* But that
concern is entirely separate fro
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 56 of 239
of § 3509(k) applied to conduct predating its enactment in 1990)). The Eighth Circuit’s
reasoning—which addressed earlier versions
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 53 of 239
preclude such prosecution during the life of the child, or for ten years after the offense, whichever
is longer.”).
Finally, later
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 51 of 239
In the alternative, Maxwell argues that Section 3283 is inapplicable because the offenses
charged in the Indictment do not “involv[
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 50 of 239
claiming that the USAO-SDFL made promises that were not contained in the NPA. Nor has she
pointed to anything in the extensive reco
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 49 of 239
the defendant asks this Court to authorize an extensive and burdensome fishing expedition,
premised on the defendant’s pure conject
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 48 of 239
OPR Report at 167.'° After reviewing the facts and circumstances of the negotiation, OPR
concluded that “the evidence does not show
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 47 of 239
“a direct and primary object of the contracting parties was to confer a benefit on the third party.”
Fla. W. Int’l Airways, Inc., 8