Back to Network
4
Shared Docs
4
Same-Page
4 / 4
Mentions
Document Mentions (4 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
d with a jury drawn from the "Long Island Division." Yet the Second Circuit rejected the defendant's claimed entitlement to a jury drawn from Kings, Queens and Richmond counties, or the entire Eastern District, because that argument—like the defendant's here—was based on a flawed premise. The defendan
se at trial." United States v. Torres, 901 F.2d 205, 234 (2d Cir. 1990), abrogated on other grounds by United States v. Marcus, 628 F.3d 36, 41 (2d Cir.2010) (emphasis added) (internal quotation mark omitted). Accordingly, "[a] bill of particulars is required `only where the charges of the indictment are
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
d with a jury drawn from the "Long Island Division." Yet the Second Circuit rejected the defendant's claimed entitlement to a jury drawn from Kings, Queens and Richmond counties, or the entire Eastern District, because that argument—like the defendant's here—was based on a flawed premise. The defendan
se at trial." United States v. Torres, 901 F.2d 205, 234 (2d Cir. 1990), abrogated on other grounds by United States v. Marcus, 628 F.3d 36, 41 (2d Cir.2010) (emphasis added) (internal quotation mark omitted). Accordingly, "[a] bill of particulars is required 'only where the charges of the indictment are
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
d with a jury drawn from the "Long Island Division." Yet the Second Circuit rejected the defendant's claimed entitlement to a jury drawn from Kings, Queens and Richmond counties, or the entire Eastern District, because that argument—like the defendant's here—was based on a flawed premise. The defendan
se at trial." United States v. Torres, 901 F.2d 205, 234 (2d Cir. 1990), abrogated on other grounds by United States v. Marcus, 628 F.3d 36, 41 (2d Cir.2010) (emphasis added) (internal quotation mark omitted). Accordingly, "[a] bill of particulars is required 'only where the charges of the indictment are
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
d with a jury drawn from the "Long Island Division." Yet the Second Circuit rejected the defendant's claimed entitlement to a jury drawn from Kings, Queens and Richmond counties, or the entire Eastern District, because that argument—like the defendant's here—was based on a flawed premise. The defendan
se at trial." United States v. Torres, 901 F.2d 205, 234 (2d Cir. 1990), abrogated on other grounds by United States v. Marcus, 628 F.3d 36, 41 (2d Cir.2010) (emphasis added) (internal quotation mark omitted). Accordingly, "[a] bill of particulars is required `only where the charges of the indictment are
Sponsored
Mutual Connections (133)
Entities connected to both Queens and Cir.2010
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON204 w/ Queens·8 w/ Cir.2010
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON57 w/ Queens·5 w/ Cir.2010
LB
Leon Black
PERSON55 w/ Queens·5 w/ Cir.2010
United States
LOCATION51 w/ Queens·8 w/ Cir.2010
John F. Kennedy
PERSON52 w/ Queens·6 w/ Cir.2010
Prince Charles
PERSON50 w/ Queens·2 w/ Cir.2010
Julie K. Brown
PERSON45 w/ Queens·2 w/ Cir.2010
ET
Emmy Taylor
PERSON41 w/ Queens·4 w/ Cir.2010
Scarlett Johansson
PERSON38 w/ Queens·6 w/ Cir.2010
Bronx
LOCATION38 w/ Queens·5 w/ Cir.2010
Wilbur Ross
PERSON34 w/ Queens·2 w/ Cir.2010
Supreme Court
ORGANIZATION32 w/ Queens·3 w/ Cir.2010
Michael Cohen
PERSON31 w/ Queens·2 w/ Cir.2010
Richmond
LOCATION29 w/ Queens·4 w/ Cir.2010
the Southern District
LOCATION30 w/ Queens·2 w/ Cir.2010
CO
Collins
PERSON26 w/ Queens·4 w/ Cir.2010
Bill Richardson
PERSON25 w/ Queens·5 w/ Cir.2010
Bradley Cooper
PERSON28 w/ Queens·2 w/ Cir.2010
Louisiana
LOCATION24 w/ Queens·4 w/ Cir.2010
Barneys New York
ORGANIZATION23 w/ Queens·4 w/ Cir.2010