Epstein Secrets

reement [2] Leach argues that the government's advocacy for the § 4B1.5(a) enhancement breached the plea agreement. The government stipulated that Leach's base offense level was 24, but the enhancement, if applied, would have increased Leach's offense level to 34. Leach further contends that becaus

ommerce to attempt to persuade, induce, and entice a minor to engage in illegal sexual activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). In sentencing Leach, the district court declined to apply enhancements advocated by the government under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.5(a) or, alternatively, under § 4B1.5(b). Leac

H... 12/18/2007 EFTA00191987 Page 4 of 13 77 Fed.Appx. 371 77 Fed.Appx. 37I, 2003 WL 22331999 (C.A.6 (Ohio)) (Cite as: 77 Fed.Appx. 371) under Ashcroft I Free Speech Coalition. 535 U.S. 234. 122 S.Ct. 1389, 152 L.Ed.2d 403 (2002), because the government failed to prove that the depictions in the c

B. Binion, LEAD ATTORNEYS, Briskman & Binion, P.C., Mobile, AL. For Specialty Fuels BTU, LLC, Defendant: James B. Newman, LEAD ATTORNEY, Helmsing, Leach, Herlong, Newman & Rouse, P.C., Mobile, AL. For internal use only SDNY_GM_00056891 CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO FED. R.CON(F IDENTIAL DB-SDNY-00197

e plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Ashcroft v. lqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 173 L. Ed. 2d 868 (2009). Finally, the Court considers "only the allegations in the complaint, exhibi

.,,15--T,•4”flot a l tiera a ic.,;(,?„, :-: •.,..ir, :,,t1- : .‘,,,. a V. aka% „.. .:,. . . FACILITY FACTS/COMMUNICATION ' CHARGE U.S. v. Leach, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS Internet Internet chat room conversations with "14 year-old"; arranged to meet for sex; 2422(b); 2423(b); 2253 (criminal

ther than use of intemet available. Pled guilty to 2422(b) & 2252A; sentenced to 51 months & 2 years supervision; challenged conviction based on Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 122 S.Ct. 1389 (2002) finding parts of Child Protection Act unconstitutional; claimed ineffective counsel. Affirmed. 24