Epstein Secrets

iness 193 2. The SDNY Jury Plan 194 B. Applicable Law 197 C. Discussion 197 1. The Defendant Was Properly Indicted by a Grand Jury Sitting in White Plains 198 2. The Defendant's Fair Cross-Section Claim Is Meritless 204 a. The Defendant Has Not Established that Blacks or Hispanics Are Unfairly Repr

Conzielle, 171 F.3d at 752 (citations omitted). The burden for proving both prongs of the standard rests squarely on the defendant. United States v. Scarpa, 913 F.3d 993, 1014 (2d Cir. 1990); United States v. Rubin, 609 F.2d 51, 66 (2d Cir. 1979); United States v. Ricco, 549 F.2d 264, 272 (2d Cir. 1977

ess 194 2. The SDNY Jury Plan 195 B. Applicable Law 197 C. Discussion 198 1. The Defendant Was Properly Indicted by a Grand Jury Sitting in White Plains 198 2. The Defendant's Fair Cross-Section Claim Is Meritless 205 a. The Defendant Has Not Established that Blacks or Hispanics Are Unfairly Repres

Cornielle, 171 F.3d at 752 (citations omitted). The burden for proving both prongs of the standard rests squarely on the defendant. United States v. Scarpa, 913 F.3d 993, 1014 (2d Cir. 1990); United States v. Rubin, 609 F.2d 51, 66 (2d Cir. 1979); United States v. 42 EFTA00103067 Ricco, 549 F.2d 264

cluding 404(b) notice, at your convenience. Requests 21 and 22 — Information about the Grand Jury that Indicted this Case: A grand jury sitting in White Plains, New York that was empaneled in November 2019 returned Indictment 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) and Superseding Indictment S 120 Cr. 330 (AJN). No grand jurors

ed periods or uncharged events—to rebut the Government's evidence with respect to the charged crimes or events. Dkt. 65; see, e.g., United States v. Scarpa, 897 F.2d 63, 70 (2d Cir. 1990) ("A defendant may not seek to establish his innocence . . . through proof of the absence of criminal acts on [other