Back to Network
11
Shared Docs
11
Same-Page
11 / 11
Mentions
Document Mentions (11 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
he civil case have worked with her for years and are particularly familiar with the facts surrounding the criminal prosecution. See United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064, 1070-71 (2d Cir. 1982). The Court is of course cognizant of the burden separate trials may impose on all trial participants. But m
54. Congress enacted the limitations provision of the PROTECT Act because it found the prior statute of limitations was "inadequate in many cases." H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-63, at 54 (2003). For example, a person who abducted and raped a child could not be prosecuted beyond this extended limit—even if DNA
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
he civil case have worked with her for years and are particularly familiar with the facts surrounding the criminal prosecution. See United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064, 1070-71 (2d Cir. 1982). The Court is of course cognizant of the burden separate trials may impose on all trial participants. But m
54. Congress enacted the limitations provision of the PROTECT Act because it found the prior statute of limitations was "inadequate in many cases." H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-63, at 54 (2003). For example, a person who abducted and raped a child could not be prosecuted beyond this extended limit—even if DNA
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
he civil case have worked with her for years and are particularly familiar with the facts surrounding the criminal prosecution. See United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064, 1070-71 (2d Cir. 1982). The Court is of course cognizant of the burden separate trials may impose on all trial participants. But m
54. Congress enacted the limitations provision of the PROTECT Act because it found the prior statute of limitations was "inadequate in many cases." H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-63, at 54 (2003). For example, a person who abducted and raped a child could not be prosecuted beyond this extended limit—even if DNA
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
he civil case have worked with her for years and are particularly familiar with the facts surrounding the criminal prosecution. See United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064, 1070-71 (2d Cir. 1982). The Court is of course cognizant of the burden separate trials may impose on all trial participants. But m
54. Congress enacted the limitations provision of the PROTECT Act because it found the prior statute of limitations was "inadequate in many cases." H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-63, at 54 (2003). For example, a person who abducted and raped a child could not be prosecuted beyond this extended limit—even if DNA
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
he civil case have worked with her for years and are particularly familiar with the facts surrounding the criminal prosecution. See United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064, 1070-71 (2d Cir. 1982). The Court is of course cognizant of the burden separate trials may impose on all trial participants. But m
54. Congress enacted the limitations provision of the PROTECT Act because it found the prior statute of limitations was "inadequate in many cases." H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-63, at 54 (2003). For example, a person who abducted and raped a child could not be prosecuted beyond this extended limit—even if DNA
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
he civil case have worked with her for years and are particularly familiar with the facts surrounding the criminal prosecution. See United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064, 1070-71 (2d Cir. 1982). The Court is of course cognizant of the burden separate trials may impose on all trial participants. But m
54. Congress enacted the limitations provision of the PROTECT Act because it found the prior statute of limitations was "inadequate in many cases." H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-63, at 54 (2003). For example, a person who abducted and raped a child could not be prosecuted beyond this extended limit—even if DNA
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
he civil case have worked with her for years and are particularly familiar with the facts surrounding the criminal prosecution. See United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064, 1070-71 (2d Cir. 1982). The Court is of course cognizant of the burden separate trials may impose on all trial participants. But m
54. Congress enacted the limitations provision of the PROTECT Act because it found the prior statute of limitations was "inadequate in many cases." H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-63, at 54 (2003). For example, a person who abducted and raped a child could not be prosecuted beyond this extended limit—even if DNA
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
he civil case have worked with her for years and are particularly familiar with the facts surrounding the criminal prosecution. See United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064, 1070-71 (2d Cir. 1982). The Court is of course cognizant of the burden separate trials may impose on all trial participants. But m
54. Congress enacted the limitations provision of the PROTECT Act because it found the prior statute of limitations was "inadequate in many cases." H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-63, at 54 (2003). For example, a person who abducted and raped a child could not be prosecuted beyond this extended limit—even if DNA
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
he civil case have worked with her for years and are particularly familiar with the facts surrounding the criminal prosecution. See United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064, 1070-71 (2d Cir. 1982). The Court is of course cognizant of the burden separate trials may impose on all trial participants. But m
54. Congress enacted the limitations provision of the PROTECT Act because it found the prior statute of limitations was "inadequate in many cases." H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-63, at 54 (2003). For example, a person who abducted and raped a child could not be prosecuted beyond this extended limit—even if DNA
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
he civil case have worked with her for years and are particularly familiar with the facts surrounding the criminal prosecution. See United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064, 1070-71 (2d Cir. 1982). The Court is of course cognizant of the burden separate trials may impose on all trial participants. But m
54. Congress enacted the limitations provision of the PROTECT Act because it found the prior statute of limitations was "inadequate in many cases." H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-63, at 54 (2003). For example, a person who abducted and raped a child could not be prosecuted beyond this extended limit—even if DNA
Sponsored
Mutual Connections (197)
Entities connected to both Cunningham and H.R. Conf
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON68 w/ Cunningham·24 w/ H.R.
United States
LOCATION34 w/ Cunningham·24 w/ H.R.
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON25 w/ Cunningham·19 w/ H.R.
ET
Emmy Taylor
PERSON25 w/ Cunningham·18 w/ H.R.
FBI
ORGANIZATION25 w/ Cunningham·17 w/ H.R.
Scarlett Johansson
PERSON22 w/ Cunningham·19 w/ H.R.
Supreme Court
ORGANIZATION25 w/ Cunningham·16 w/ H.R.
the Southern District
LOCATION16 w/ Cunningham·23 w/ H.R.
CO
Collins
PERSON23 w/ Cunningham·16 w/ H.R.
Alberto Gonzales
PERSON13 w/ Cunningham·22 w/ H.R.
Eric Holder
PERSON18 w/ Cunningham·16 w/ H.R.
TH
Thompson
PERSON18 w/ Cunningham·16 w/ H.R.
Hernandez
PERSON18 w/ Cunningham·16 w/ H.R.
SC
Schneider
PERSON17 w/ Cunningham·16 w/ H.R.
WE
Werner
PERSON17 w/ Cunningham·16 w/ H.R.
SA
Santobello
PERSON16 w/ Cunningham·16 w/ H.R.
SA
Sampson
PERSON16 w/ Cunningham·16 w/ H.R.
AL
Aleman
PERSON15 w/ Cunningham·16 w/ H.R.
RU
Russo
PERSON14 w/ Cunningham·17 w/ H.R.
CO
Concepcion
PERSON15 w/ Cunningham·16 w/ H.R.