3
Shared Docs
1
Same-Page
4 / 3
Mentions
th suppliers and consumers of commercial sex acts. It would be helpful for us to get as many cases addressing that issue as possible, especially in the Second Circuit but honestly nationwide, for cases charged during the time period from when the statute was passed initially in 2000 through when it was amended. T
91 that Congress never stated. We hold § 1591 applies to a purchaser of commercial sex acts who violates the statute's terms."1075 United States v. Mikoloyck, No. 09-00036-01-CRWGAF, 2009 WL 4798900, at *1 (W.D. Mo. Dec. 7, 2009) • Defendant charged with USC 1591 after responding to a fake Craigslist ad
ed provides the motive for him do so and is another significant factor in assessing the risk of flight. See United States v. Jackson, 823 F.2d 4, 7 (2d Cir. 1987). So too is the strength of the evidence, detailed above and in the Government's Detention Memo. Indeed, that evidence, already robust less th
Page: EFTA00015536 →983 (8th Cir. 2015) (rejecting a constitutional challenge that Section 1591 would be void for vagueness if applied to purchasers); United States v. Mikoloyck, No. 09 Cr. 036, 2009 WL 4798900 (W.D. Mo. Dec. 7, 2009) ("contrary to defendant's argument, 18 U.S.C. § 1591 clearly applies to those who attempt
Page: EFTA00015545 →n to dozens of victims who were abused in Florida. 2 While beyond the scope of a bail hearing, as discussed further below, it is well-established in the Second Circuit that absent an express provision to the contrary in the agreement, one District is not bound by the terms of an agreement entered into between a def
Page: EFTA00015549 →elaborately replicate a detention facility without the confidence of security such a facility instills."' United States v. Orena, 986 F.2d 628, 632 (2d Cir. 1993) (quoting United States v. Gotti, 776 F. Supp. 666, 672 (E.D.N.Y. 1991) (rejecting private jail proposal)); see also Valerio, 9 F. Supp. 3d at
Page: EFTA00028792 →983 (8th Cir. 2015) (rejecting a constitutional challenge that Section 1591 would be void for vagueness if applied to purchasers); United States v. Mikoloyck, No. 09 Cr. 036, 2009 WL 4798900 (W.D. Mo. Dec. 7, 2009) ("contrary to defendant's argument, 18 U.S.C. § 1591 clearly applies to those who attempt
Page: EFTA00028798 →Entities connected to both Second Circuit and Mikoloyck

Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON
United States
LOCATIONthe Southern District
LOCATION
Department of Justice
ORGANIZATION
Prince Andrew
PERSON
Julie K. Brown
PERSON
Michael Cohen
PERSON
Southern District of New York
ORGANIZATIONMartin Weinberg
PERSON
Michael Jackson
PERSON
New York
LOCATIONFBI
ORGANIZATION
Harry Reid
PERSON
Reid Weingarten
PERSON
New York State
LOCATION
Anderson
PERSONDistrict Court for the Southern District of New York
ORGANIZATION
Geoffrey S. Berman
PERSONEmmy Taylor
PERSON