Back to Network
6
Shared Docs
0
Same-Page
7 / 7
Mentions
Document Mentions (6 shared documents)
4 mentions
Page EFTA00015539
Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United States v. Benatar, No. 02 Cr. 099, 2002 WL 31410262, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 10, 2002) (same). 5. Private Security is Inadequate, Unfair, and Impractical Here The defe
Page: EFTA00015539 →Page EFTA00015544
ited States v. Brown, No. 99-1230, 2002 WL 34244994, at *2 (2d Cir. Apr. 26, 2002) (in analyzing an SDFL plea agreement, reiterating the holding of Annabi and noting that it applies "even if the plea agreement purports to bind 'the Government' or the "United States") (summary order); United States v. B
Page: EFTA00015544 →trict in which the plea is entered unless it affirmatively appears that the agreement contemplates a broader restriction.") (citing United States v. Annabi, 771 F.2d 670, 672 (2d Cir. 1985) (per curiam)). Moreover, any references in an NPA to the "Government" or the "United States" do not abrogate thes
Page: EFTA00015544 →Page EFTA00015553
Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F.Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United States v. Benatar, No. 02 Cr. 099, 2002 WL 31410262, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 10, 2002) (same). Finally, there can be little doubt that the defendant is in a position to
Page: EFTA00015553 →2 mentions
Page EFTA00024589
es v. Annabi, 771 F.2d 670, 672 (2d Cir. 1985) (per curiam)). This is true even if the text of the agreement purports to bind "the Government." See Annabi, 771 F.2d at 672. This analysis similarly extends to a non-prosecution agreement. See United States v. Laskow, 688 F. Supp. 851, 854 (E.D.N.Y. 1988
Page: EFTA00024589 →Page EFTA00024591
Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F.Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United States v. Benatar, No. 02 Cr. 099, 2002 WL 31410262, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 10, 2002) (same). Finally, there can be little doubt that the defendant is in a position to
Page: EFTA00024591 →2 mentions
Page EFTA00028302
es v. Annabi, 771 F.2d 670, 672 (2d Cir. 1985) (per curiam)). This is true even if the text of the agreement purports to bind "the Government." See Annabi, 771 F.2d at 672. This analysis similarly extends to a non-prosecution agreement. See United States v. Laskow, 688 F. Supp. 851, 854 (E.D.N.Y. 1988
Page: EFTA00028302 →Page EFTA00028304
Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F.Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United States v. Benatar, No. 02 Cr. 099, 2002 WL 31410262, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 10, 2002) (same). Finally, there can be little doubt that the defendant is in a position to
Page: EFTA00028304 →Sponsored
2 mentions
Page EFTA00028792
Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United States v. Benatar, No. 02 Cr. 099, 2002 WL 31410262, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 10, 2002) (same). 5. Private Security is Inadequate, Unfair, and Impractical Here The defe
Page: EFTA00028792 →Page EFTA00028797
trict in which the plea is entered unless it affirmatively appears that the agreement contemplates a broader restriction.") (citing United States v. Annabi, 771 F.2d 670, 672 (2d Cir. 1985) (per curiam)). Moreover, any references in an NPA to the "Government" or the "United States" do not abrogate thes
Page: EFTA00028797 →2 mentions
Page EFTA00029009
es v. Annabi, 771 F.2d 670, 672 (2d Cir. 1985) (per curiam)). This is true even if the text of the agreement purports to bind "the Government." See Annabi, 771 F.2d at 672. This analysis similarly extends to a non-prosecution agreement. See United States v. Laskow, 688 F. Supp. 851, 854 (E.D.N.Y. 1988
Page: EFTA00029009 →Page EFTA00029011
Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F.Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United States v. Benatar, No. 02 Cr. 099, 2002 WL 31410262, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 10, 2002) (same). Finally, there can be little doubt that the defendant is in a position to
Page: EFTA00029011 →2 mentions
Page EFTA00030837
es v. Annabi, 771 F.2d 670, 672 (2d Cir. 1985) (per curiam)). This is true even if the text of the agreement purports to bind "the Government." See Annabi, 771 F.2d at 672. This analysis similarly extends to a non-prosecution agreement. See United States v. Laskow, 688 F. Supp. 851, 854 (E.D.N.Y. 1988
Page: EFTA00030837 →Page EFTA00030839
Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F.Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United States v. Benatar, No. 02 Cr. 099, 2002 WL 31410262, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 10, 2002) (same). Finally, there can be little doubt that the defendant is in a position to
Page: EFTA00030839 →Sponsored
Mutual Connections (87)
Entities connected to both Annabi and Benatar
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON59 w/ Annabi·9 w/ Benatar
United States
LOCATION55 w/ Annabi·5 w/ Benatar
Reid Weingarten
PERSON46 w/ Annabi·7 w/ Benatar
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON43 w/ Annabi·2 w/ Benatar
Michael Jackson
PERSON32 w/ Annabi·9 w/ Benatar
LA
Laskow
PERSON35 w/ Annabi·6 w/ Benatar
MW
Martin Weinberg
PERSON32 w/ Annabi·8 w/ Benatar
Anderson
PERSON32 w/ Annabi·8 w/ Benatar
SA
Salameh
PERSON37 w/ Annabi·2 w/ Benatar
Second Circuit
ORGANIZATION31 w/ Annabi·8 w/ Benatar
ET
Emmy Taylor
PERSON37 w/ Annabi·2 w/ Benatar
Prince Andrew
PERSON32 w/ Annabi·6 w/ Benatar
FBI
ORGANIZATION36 w/ Annabi·2 w/ Benatar
New York State
LOCATION31 w/ Annabi·7 w/ Benatar
Department of Justice
ORGANIZATION32 w/ Annabi·3 w/ Benatar
CA
Casteneda
PERSON27 w/ Annabi·8 w/ Benatar
PI
Pitman
PERSON27 w/ Annabi·7 w/ Benatar
Harry Reid
PERSON27 w/ Annabi·7 w/ Benatar
Icarus
PERSON27 w/ Annabi·6 w/ Benatar
Richard M. Berman
PERSON26 w/ Annabi·7 w/ Benatar