Epstein Secrets

ephberg, courts in this Circuit have routinely denied pre-trial motions to dismiss potentially multiplicitous counts as premature." United States v. Medina, No. I 3-cr-272 27 EFTA00103299 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 28 of 34 (PGG), 2014 WL 3057917, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 7,

207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres

ephberg, courts in this Circuit have routinely denied pre-trial motions to dismiss potentially multiplicitous counts as premature." United States v. Medina, No. I 3-cr-272 27 EFTA00103369 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 28 of 34 (PGG), 2014 WL 3057917, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 7,

207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres

ephberg, courts in this Circuit have routinely denied pre-trial motions to dismiss potentially multiplicitous counts as premature." United States v. Medina, No. I 3-cr-272 27 EFTA00103334 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 28 of 34 (PGG), 2014 WL 3057917, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 7,

207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres

ephberg, courts in this Circuit have routinely denied pre-trial motions to dismiss potentially multiplicitous counts as premature." United States v. Medina, No. I 3-cr-272 27 EFTA00103264 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 28 of 34 (PGG), 2014 WL 3057917, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 7,

207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres

ephberg, courts in this Circuit have routinely denied pre-trial motions to dismiss potentially multiplicitous counts as premature." United States v. Medina, No. I 3-cr-272 27 EFTA00104678 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 28 of 34 (PGG), 2014 WL 3057917, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 7,

207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres

ephberg, courts in this Circuit have routinely denied pre-trial motions to dismiss potentially multiplicitous counts as premature." United States v. Medina, No. I 3-cr-272 27 EFTA00105689 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 28 of 34 (PGG), 2014 WL 3057917, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 7,

207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres

ephberg, courts in this Circuit have routinely denied pre-trial motions to dismiss potentially multiplicitous counts as premature." United States v. Medina, No. I 3-cr-272 27 EFTA00154666 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 28 of 34 (PGG), 2014 WL 3057917, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 7,

207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres

ephberg, courts in this Circuit have routinely denied pre-trial motions to dismiss potentially multiplicitous counts as premature." United States v. Medina, No. I 3-cr-272 27 EFTA00085251 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 28 of 34 (PGG), 2014 WL 3057917, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 7,

207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres

ephberg, courts in this Circuit have routinely denied pre-trial motions to dismiss potentially multiplicitous counts as premature." United States v. Medina, No. I 3-cr-272 27 EFTA00090520 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 28 of 34 (PGG), 2014 WL 3057917, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 7,

207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres

ephberg, courts in this Circuit have routinely denied pre-trial motions to dismiss potentially multiplicitous counts as premature." United States v. Medina, No. I 3-cr-272 27 EFTA00092781 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 28 of 34 (PGG), 2014 WL 3057917, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 7,

207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres