Back to Network
10
Shared Docs
10
Same-Page
10 / 10
Mentions
Document Mentions (10 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page EFTA00030252Same page
merely reduce his head start should he decide to flee. See United States v. Zarger, No. 00 Cr. 773, 2000 WL 1134364, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2000) (Gleeson, J.) (rejecting defendant's application for bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best ... limits a fleeing defendant's
Page: EFTA00030252 →l Reform Act and the United States Constitution." United States v. Valerio, 9 F. Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, the
Page: EFTA00030252 →2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
merely reduce his head start should he decide to flee. See United States v. Zarger, No. 00 Cr. 773, 2000 WL 1134364, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2000) (Gleeson, J.) (rejecting defendant's application for bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendan
il Reform Act and the United States Constitution." United States v. Valerio, 9 F. Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, th
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
merely reduce his head start should he decide to flee. See United States v. Zarger, No. 00 Cr. 773, 2000 WL 1134364, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2000) (Gleeson, J.) (rejecting defendant's application for bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendan
il Reform Act and the United States Constitution." United States v. Valerio, 9 F. Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, th
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
merely reduce his head start should he decide to flee. See United States v. Zarger, No. 00 Cr. 773, 2000 WL 1134364, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2000) (Gleeson, J.) (rejecting defendant's application for bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendan
il Reform Act and the United States Constitution." United States v. Valerio, 9 F. Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, th
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
merely reduce his head start should he decide to flee. See United States v. Zarger, No. 00 Cr. 773, 2000 WL 1134364, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2000) (Gleeson, J.) (rejecting defendant's application for bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendan
il Reform Act and the United States Constitution." United States v. Valerio, 9 F. Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, th
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
merely reduce his head start should he decide to flee. See United States v. Zarger, No. 00 Cr. 773, 2000 WL 1134364, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2000) (Gleeson, J.) (rejecting defendant's application for bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendan
il Reform Act and the United States Constitution." United States v. Valerio, 9 F. Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, th
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
merely reduce his head start should he decide to flee. See United States v. Zarger, No. 00 Cr. 773, 2000 WL 1134364, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2000) (Gleeson, J.) (rejecting defendant's application for bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendan
il Reform Act and the United States Constitution." United States v. Valerio, 9 F. Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, th
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
merely reduce his head start should he decide to flee. See United States v. Zarger, No. 00 Cr. 773, 2000 WL 1134364, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2000) (Gleeson, J.) (rejecting defendant's application for bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendan
il Reform Act and the United States Constitution." United States v. Valerio, 9 F. Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, th
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
merely reduce his head start should he decide to flee. See United States v. Zarger, No. 00 Cr. 773, 2000 WL 1134364, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2000) (Gleeson, J.) (rejecting defendant's application for bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendan
il Reform Act and the United States Constitution." United States v. Valerio, 9 F. Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, th
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
merely reduce his head start should he decide to flee. See United States v. Zarger, No. 00 Cr. 773, 2000 WL 1134364, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2000) (Gleeson, J.) (rejecting defendant's application for bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendan
il Reform Act and the United States Constitution." United States v. Valerio, 9 F. Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, th
Sponsored
Mutual Connections (131)
Entities connected to both Gleeson and The Second Circuit
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON36 w/ Gleeson·55 w/ The
United States
LOCATION31 w/ Gleeson·39 w/ The
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON20 w/ Gleeson·45 w/ The
Prince Andrew
PERSON26 w/ Gleeson·28 w/ The
the Southern District
LOCATION26 w/ Gleeson·25 w/ The
Department of Justice
ORGANIZATION24 w/ Gleeson·26 w/ The
Anderson
PERSON32 w/ Gleeson·17 w/ The
Michael Jackson
PERSON32 w/ Gleeson·15 w/ The
MW
Martin Weinberg
PERSON26 w/ Gleeson·20 w/ The
Michael Cohen
PERSON15 w/ Gleeson·30 w/ The
Reid Weingarten
PERSON25 w/ Gleeson·20 w/ The
CA
Casteneda
PERSON32 w/ Gleeson·13 w/ The
Harry Reid
PERSON25 w/ Gleeson·19 w/ The
Southern District of New York
ORGANIZATION25 w/ Gleeson·18 w/ The
New York State
LOCATION25 w/ Gleeson·17 w/ The
U.S. Virgin Islands
LOCATION25 w/ Gleeson·15 w/ The
Ferranti
PERSON31 w/ Gleeson·9 w/ The
LA
LaFontaine
PERSON31 w/ Gleeson·9 w/ The
PI
Pitman
PERSON25 w/ Gleeson·14 w/ The
AN
Annabi
PERSON26 w/ Gleeson·13 w/ The