Back to Network
4
Shared Docs
4
Same-Page
4 / 4
Mentions
Document Mentions (4 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
t that argument ignores a fundamental tenet of conspiracy law. It is axiomatic that a conspiracy does not require a completed substantive crime. See Salinas v. United States, 522 U.S. 52, 65 (1997) ("It is elementary that a conspiracy may exist and be punished whether or not the substantive crime ensure
wyer is called "on a significant issue other than on behalf of the client, and it is apparent that the testimony may be prejudicial to the client." N.Y. R.P.C. 3.7(b); see generally Murray v. Met. Life Ins. Co., 583 F.3d 173, 177-80 (2d Cir. 2009) (discussing the advocate-witness rule). 149 EFTA00100116 VII.
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
t that argument ignores a fundamental tenet of conspiracy law. It is axiomatic that a conspiracy does not require a completed substantive crime. See Salinas v. United States, 522 U.S. 52, 65 (1997) ("It is elementary that a conspiracy may exist and be punished whether or not the substantive crime ensure
wyer is called "on a significant issue other than on behalf of the client, and it is apparent that the testimony may be prejudicial to the client." N.Y. R.P.C. 3.7(b); see generally Murray v. Met. Life Ins. Co., 583 F.3d 173, 177-80 (2d Cir. 2009) (discussing the advocate-witness rule). 149 EFTA00077781 VII.
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
t that argument ignores a fundamental tenet of conspiracy law. It is axiomatic that a conspiracy does not require a completed substantive crime. See Salinas v. United States, 522 U.S. 52, 65 (1997) ("It is elementary that a conspiracy may exist and be punished whether or not the substantive crime ensure
wyer is called "on a significant issue other than on behalf of the client, and it is apparent that the testimony may be prejudicial to the client." N.Y. R.P.C. 3.7(b); see generally Murray v. Met. Life Ins. Co., 583 F.3d 173, 177-80 (2d Cir. 2009) (discussing the advocate-witness rule). 149 EFTA00039596 VII.
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
t that argument ignores a fundamental tenet of conspiracy law. It is axiomatic that a conspiracy does not require a completed substantive crime. See Salinas v. United States, 522 U.S. 52, 65 (1997) ("It is elementary that a conspiracy may exist and be punished whether or not the substantive crime ensure
wyer is called "on a significant issue other than on behalf of the client, and it is apparent that the testimony may be prejudicial to the client." N.Y. R.P.C. 3.7(b); see generally Murray v. Met. Life Ins. Co., 583 F.3d 173, 177-80 (2d Cir. 2009) (discussing the advocate-witness rule). 149 EFTA00103174 VII.
Sponsored
Mutual Connections (252)
Entities connected to both Salinas and N.Y. R.P.C. 3.7(b
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON25 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON24 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
United States
LOCATION22 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
Julie K. Brown
PERSON18 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
MF
Maria Farmer
PERSON18 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
Minnesota
LOCATION17 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
Supreme Court
ORGANIZATION16 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
Scarlett Johansson
PERSON16 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
George Mitchell
PERSON15 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
WE
Werner
PERSON15 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
Michael Jackson
PERSON15 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
Southern District of New York
ORGANIZATION13 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
MC
McAleenan
PERSON13 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
Adriana Ross
PERSON13 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
Sacramento
LOCATION13 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
Colorado
LOCATION13 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
Bill Richardson
PERSON13 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
MY
Myers
PERSON13 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
TH
Thompson
PERSON12 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.
BE
Benussi
PERSON12 w/ Salinas·4 w/ N.Y.