5
Shared Docs
2
Same-Page
5 / 5
Mentions
e activity was not "sexual enough" to qualify as "prostitution." Title 18 carries no definition of "prostitution." In United States v. Prince , the Fifth Circuit approved of the generic definition "sexual intercourse for hire" where the West Virginia statues also lacked a definition. Prince , 515 F.2d 564, 5
(citing United States v. Griffith , 284 F.3d 338, 351 (2d Cir. 2002); United States v. Taylor , 239 F.3d 994, 997 (9th Cir. 2001); United States v. Scisum , 32 F.3d 1479, 1485-86 (10th Cir. 1994); United States v. Hamilton , 456 F.2d 171, 173 (3d Cir. 1982)). Instead, the court concluded that the Gove
e activity was not "sexual enough" to qualify as "prostitution." Title 18 carries no definition of "prostitution." In United States v. Prince , the Fifth Circuit approved of the generic definition "sexual intercourse for hire" where the West Virginia statues also lacked a definition. Prince , 515 F.2d 564, 5
(citing United States v. Griffith , 284 F.3d 338, 351 (2d Cir. 2002); United States v. Taylor , 239 F.3d 994, 997 (9th Cir. 2001); United States v. Scisum , 32 F.3d 1479, 1485-86 (10th Cir. 1994); United States v. Hamilton , 456 F.2d 171, 173 (3d Cir. 1982)). Instead, the court concluded that the Gove
(citing United States v. Griffith , 284 F.3d 338, 351 (2d Cir. 2002); United States v. Taylor , 239 F.3d 994, 997 (9th Cir. 2001); United States v. Scisum , 32 F.3d 1479, 1485-86 (10th Cir. 1994); United States v. Hamilton , 456 F.2d 171, 173 (3d Cir. 1982)). Instead, the court concluded that the Gove
Page: EFTA02857732_p3 →e activity was not "sexual enough" to qualify as "prostitution." Title 18 carries no definition of "prostitution." In United States v. Prince , the Fifth Circuit approved of the generic definition "sexual intercourse for hire". Prince , 515 F.2d 564, 566 (5th Cir. 1975). FI2 In 1946, the Supreme Court defin
Page: EFTA02857732_p7 →(citing United States v. Griffith , 284 F.3d 338, 351 (2d Cir. 2002); United States v. Taylor , 239 F.3d 994, 997 (9th Cir. 2001); United States v. Scisum , 32 F.3d 1479, 1485-86 (10th Cir. 1994); United States v. Hamilton , 456 F.2d 171, 173 (3d Cir. 1982)). Instead, the court concluded that the Gove
Page: EFTA02857763_p3 →e activity was not "sexual enough" to qualify as "prostitution." Title 18 carries no definition of "prostitution." In United States v. Prince , the Fifth Circuit approved of the generic definition "sexual intercourse for hire". Prince , 515 F.2d 564, 566 (5th Cir. 1975). Fl In 1946, the Supreme Court define
Page: EFTA02857763_p7 →(citing United States v. Griffith , 284 F.3d 338, 351 (2d Cir. 2002); United States v. Taylor , 239 F.3d 994, 997 (9th Cir. 2001); United States v. Scisum , 32 F.3d 1479, 1485-86 (10th Cir. 1994); United States v. Hamilton , 456 F.2d 171, 173 (3d Cir. 1982)). Instead, the court concluded that the Gove
Page: EFTA02857810_p3 →e activity was not "sexual enough" to qualify as "prostitution." Title 18 carries no definition of "prostitution." In United States v. Prince , the Fifth Circuit approved of the generic definition "sexual intercourse for hire" where the West Virginia statues also lacked a definition. Prince , 515 F.2d 564, 5
Page: EFTA02857810_p7 →Entities connected to both Fifth Circuit and Scisum

Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON
United States
LOCATION
Marc Rich
PERSONJane Doe
PERSONLeon Black
PERSON
Alexander Acosta
PERSONEmmy Taylor
PERSON
Department of Justice
ORGANIZATIONRoy Black
PERSONBonner v. City of
LOCATION
Jacksonville
LOCATION
Supreme Court
ORGANIZATION
Virginia Giuffre
PERSON
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON
New York
LOCATIONCriminal Division
ORGANIZATION
Naomi Campbell
PERSONGerald Lefcourt
PERSON
Philadelphia
LOCATIONthe Ninth Circuit
ORGANIZATION