Epstein Secrets

as "devoid of any badgering or harass- ment." Id. Looking to the totality of the circum- stances considered by the district court, we con- cluded, in Santiago, that the district court's volun- tariness finding was not clearly erroneous. Id. Sim- ilarly, we must conclude that Mr. Johnson's concern that he m

. However, Mr. Johnson himself stated that at no time did he feel threatened or coerced. With res t to the second submission, in United States I Santiago. 428 F.3d 699, 705 (7th Cir.2005), we determined that a defendant had con- sented freely and voluntarily to a search despite his claim that officer

f- fense, which applies? United States, ev rel. Harris' Daniels, 279 Fed. 844 (2nd Cir.I992), provides guidance on this issue. In Ex. rel. Harris, the Second Circuit was faced with a potential conflict between two senten- cing provisions, one which permitted " 'all sen- tences' of summary court-martial [to] be ca

of implication Unit States' Dudley, 62 F.3d 1275, 1278 (10th Cir. 1995); Oiled States Patriarca, 948 F.2d 789, 793 (1st Cir. 1991); United States Santiago, 826 F.2d 499 (7th Cir. 1987). "[There is no conflict between Rule 46(f) and the Bail Reform Act; the Rule and the Act are complementary and form a

citations omitted). ht determining how much weight to accord the presumption after the defendant has come forward to meet his burden of production, the Second Circuit explains: A judicial officer conducting a detention hearing should, even after a defendant has come forward with rebuttal evidence, continue to giv

Overy Baker McKenzie Boehl Stopher Brenner Saltzman Brune Law PC CKR Law LLP Cadwalader Wickersham Cahill Gordon Caplin & Drysdale Casillas Santiago Clifford Chance Covington & Burling Cravath Swaine DLA Piper Davis Polk Debevoise & Plimpton Dewey Pegno Dykema Gossett PLLC EFTA00032623

ing Machine Co. Staff Ask 2nd Circ. To Nix Fraud Raps A group of former employees of a defunct Long Island vending machine company on Tuesday urged the Second Circuit to vacate their convictions for defrauding customers by lying about the money-making potential of the machines, with one worker citing ineffective