Back to Network
3
Shared Docs
3
Same-Page
6 / 3
Mentions
Document Mentions (3 shared documents)
3 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
ood that the SORA hearing would be a non-adversarial proceeding with no opportunity or need to present evidence. For the People now to suggest that Appellant erred "as a tactical matter" in trusting the prosecutor's word, and moreover, should be procedurally barred from challenging the lower court's lega
ting and lurid detail — the very Probable Cause Affidavit that the People themselves expressly repudiated as unreliable for purposes of calculating Appellant's risk level under SORA and that was rejected by the Florida prosecutors who handled Appellant's criminal case. Whether this complete abandonment
. See Correction Law §§ 168.1(2), 168- n(2); People v. Johnson, 11 N.Y.3d 416, 421 (2008). B. The District Attorney's Office Appropriately Applied the Governing Legal Standard, As Set Forth by SORA and Its Guidelines, For Assessing Appellant's Risk Level Based on Uncharged Allegations. Likewise, the decision of the Assis
3 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
ood that the SORA hearing would be a non-adversarial proceeding with no opportunity or need to present evidence. For the People now to suggest that Appellant erred "as a tactical matter" in trusting the prosecutor's word, and moreover, should be procedurally barred from challenging the Court's legally in
a prosecutors who handled Appellant's criminal case and which the People themselves expressly repudiated as unreliable for purposes of calculating Appellant's risk level under SORA. Whether this complete abandonment of the People's previous position and sudden defense of the hearing court's unsupportabl
de nor the product of any naive misunderstanding of SORA itself. 16 EFTA00798136 B. The District Attorney's Office Appropriately Applied the Governing Legal Standard, As Set Forth by SORA and Its Guidelines, For Assessing Appellant's Risk Level Based on Uncharged Allegations. The decision of the Assistant Di
3 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
ood that the SORA hearing would be a non-adversarial proceeding with no opportunity or need to present evidence. For the People now to suggest that Appellant erred "as a tactical matter" in trusting the prosecutor's word, and moreover, should be procedurally barred from challenging the Court's legally in
a prosecutors who handled Appellant's criminal case and which the People themselves expressly repudiated as unreliable for purposes of calculating Appellant's risk level under SORA. Whether this complete abandonment of the People's previous position and sudden defense of the hearing court's unsupportabl
ard. See Correction Law §§ 168- k(2), 168-n(2); People v. Johnson, 11 3d 416, 421 (2008). B. The District Attorney's Office Appropriately Applied the Governing Legal Standard, As Set Forth by SORA and Its Guidelines, For Assessing Appellant's Risk Level Based on Uncharged Allegations. Likewise, the decision of the Assis
Sponsored
Mutual Connections (45)
Entities connected to both Appellant and the Governing Legal Standard
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON34 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
Scarlett Johansson
PERSON20 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
New York
LOCATION15 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
Julie K. Brown
PERSON10 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
MW
Martin Weinberg
PERSON9 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
New York City
LOCATION9 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
Jay Lefkowitz
PERSON9 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
Samantha Power
PERSON8 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
MW
M. Weinberg
PERSON7 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
Ruth Pickholz
PERSON7 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
Criminal Term
ORGANIZATION7 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
TY
Typeface
PERSON6 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
DIGITAL-SUBMISSION COMPLIANCE
ORGANIZATION6 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
SM
Sandra Lynn Musumeci
PERSON6 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
Felony Solicitation for Prostitution
ORGANIZATION6 w/ Appellant·2 w/ the
Pataki
PERSON6 w/ Appellant·2 w/ the
Fresh Del Monte Produce N.V.
ORGANIZATION6 w/ Appellant·2 w/ the
the Appellate Court
ORGANIZATION4 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
PM
People v. Mingo
PERSON3 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the
Kilcer
LOCATION3 w/ Appellant·3 w/ the