Epstein Secrets

IFY that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing has been provided by facsimile and United States mail to: Robert D. Critton, Esquire and Michael J. Pike, Esquire, Burman, Critton, et al., Attorneys for Defendant, 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401, this 123'4- day of

y erroneous construction of 18 U.S.C. § 3858(b) — and where rescission "would [have] restore[d] the defendant to the approximate status quo ante"); Craig v. People, 986 P.2d 951, 959-60, 961-93 (Colo. 1999) (holding that plea agreement made no unlawful promises, but concluding that court would not have been req

IFY that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing has been provided by facsimile and United States mail to: Robert D. Critton, Esquire and Michael J. Pike, Esquire, Burman, Critton, et al., Attorneys for Defendant, 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401, this '23c4- day of

y erroneous construction of 18 U.S.C. § 3858(b) — and where rescission "would [have] restore[d] the defendant to the approximate status quo ante"); Craig v. People, 986 P.2d 951, 959-60, 961-93 (Colo. 1999) (holding that plea agreement made no unlawful promises, but concluding that court would not have been req

IFY that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing has been provided by facsimile and United States mail to: Robert D. Critton, Esquire and Michael J. Pike, Esquire, Burman, Critton, et al., Attorneys for Defendant, 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401, this 123'4- day of

y erroneous construction of 18 U.S.C. § 3858(b) — and where rescission "would [have] restore[d] the defendant to the approximate status quo ante"); Craig v. People, 986 P.2d 951, 959-60, 961-93 (Colo. 1999) (holding that plea agreement made no unlawful promises, but concluding that court would not have been req

IFY that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing has been provided by facsimile and United States mail to: Robert D. Critton, Esquire and Michael J. Pike, Esquire, Burman, Critton, et al., Attorneys for Defendant, 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401, this 2.3c4- day of

y erroneous construction of 18 U.S.C. § 3858(b) — and where rescission "would [have] restore[d] the defendant to the approximate status quo ante"); Craig v. People, 986 P.2d 951, 959-60, 961-93 (Colo. 1999) (holding that plea agreement made no unlawful promises, but concluding that court would not have been req