Epstein Secrets

EBRUARY 11, 2010 PAGE 2 OF 2 obligated to notify the victims identified through the federal investigation of proceedings occurring in state court, the U.S. Department of Justice's position may have changed in the interim in light of internal guidance regarding prosecutors' obligations pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3771, 42 U.S.C. §

94814 addressed the issue of whether §2255 is a civil or criminal statute for purposes of the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy. The New York Court stated that "looking to the plain language of §2255(a), it is clear that the statutory intent was to provide a civil remedy. This is exemplified by

EBRUARY 11, 2010 PAGE 2 OF 2 obligated to notify the victims identified through the federal investigation of proceedings occurring in state court, the U.S. Department of Justice's position may have chiral the interim ill of internal guidance regarding prosecutors' obligations pursuant to 18 . § 3771, 42 . § 10607, and Fed.

83860 addressed the issue of whether §2255 is a civil or criminal statute for purposes of the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy. The New York Court stated that "looking to the plain language of §2255(a), it is clear that the statutory intent was to provide a civil remedy. This is exemplified by

EPSTEIN Dated: GERALD LEFCOURT, ESQ. COUNSEL TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN Dated: itkaa" LILLY A ANCHEZ, ES ATTORNEY FOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN EFTA00233443 U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida R ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY NLIVERY BY FACSIMILE Lilly Ann Sanchez Fowler Wh

33509 addressed the issue of whether §2255 is a civil or criminal statute for purposes of the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy. The New York Court stated that "looking to the plain language of §2255(a), it is clear that the statutory intent was to provide a civil remedy. This is exemplified by