Epstein Secrets

with intent to commit murder within territorial jurisdiction of United States, district court could properly take judicial notice of fact that FCI Tallahassee was within special territorial jurisdiction of United States). 22 Respondent's Exhibit A Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRAMOHNSON EFTA00208058 Case

tion." United States v. BP Products North America, Inc., 2008 WL 501321 at *11, citing United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456, 464 (1996)(quoting Bordenkircher v. Hayes, 434 U.S. 357, 364 (1978)). Allowing claims like Petitioners' to proceed would open the inner workings of that prosecutorial discretion an

with intent to commit murder within territorial jurisdiction of United States, district court could properly take judicial notice of fact that FCI Tallahassee was within special territorial jurisdiction of United States). F lPursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3771(cX3), "[i]f the district court denies the relief soug

etion." United States v. BP Products North America, Inc 2008 WL 501321 at *11, citing United States v. Armstrong , 517 U.S. 456, 464 (1996)( quoting Bordenkircher v. Hayes , 434 U.S. 357, 364 (1978)). Allowing claims like Petitioners' to proceed would open the inner workings of that prosecutorial discretion

with intent to commit murder within territorial jurisdiction of United States, district court could properly take judicial notice of fact that FCI Tallahassee was within special territorial jurisdiction of United States). 22 EFTA00078856 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 62 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/08/2

tion." United States v. BP Products North America, Inc., 2008 WL 501321 at *11, citing United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456, 464 (1996)(quoting Bordenkircher v. Hayes, 434 U.S. 357, 364 (1978)). Allowing claims like Petitioners' to proceed would open the inner workings of that prosecutorial discretion an

with intent to commit murder within territorial jurisdiction of United States, district court could properly take judicial notice of fact that FCI Tallahassee was within special territorial jurisdiction of United States). 22 EFTA00230087 ,5tit;c7/.1.7/.7. Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 62 Entered on

etion." United States v. BP Products North America, Inc., 2008 WL 501321 at *11, citing United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456, 464 (1996Xquoting Bordenkircher v. Hayes, 434 U.S. 357, 364 (1978)). Allowing claims like Petitioners' to proceed would open the inner workings of that prosecutorial discretion an