Epstein Secrets

9, and then found that a victim's right to be reasonably heard at sentencing did not grant a right of access to the PSR. The court relied upon In re Brock, 262 Fed.Appx. 510 (4i° Cir. 2008), which held that a victim's right to be heard does not afford access to a PSR, since the victim had been provide

unseal in full, rather, pursuant to Smith and its progeny, the relevant allegations should be redacted. See, e.g., Smith, 656 F.2d at 1107 (ordering Clerk's Office to "completely and permanently obliterate and strike from the records . .. any and all identifying reference to or name of Mr. Smith" and sealing a

9, and then found that a victim's right to be reasonably heard at sentencing did not grant a right of access to the PSR. The court relied upon In re Brock, 262 Fed.Appx. 510 (4" Cir. 2008), which held that a victim's right to be heard does not afford access to a PSR, since the victim had been provided

unseal in flit rather, pursuant to Smith and its progeny, the relevant allegations should be redacted. See, e.g., Smith, 656 F.2d at 1107 (ordering Clerk's Office to "completely and permanently obliterate and strike from the records ... any and all identifying reference to or name of Mr. Smith" and sealing al

9, and then found that a victim's right to be reasonably heard at sentencing did not grant a right of access to the PSR. The court relied upon In re Brock, 262 Fed.Appx. 510 (4" Cir. 2008), which held that a victim's right to be heard does not afford access to a PSR, since the victim had been provided

unseal in full, rather, pursuant to Smith and its progeny, the relevant allegations should be redacted. See, e.g., Smith, 656 F.2d at 1107 (ordering Clerk's Office to "completely and permanently obliterate and strike from the records ... any and all identifying reference to or name of Mr. Smith" and sealing al