Back to Network
4
Shared Docs
4
Same-Page
4 / 4
Mentions
Document Mentions (4 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
the defendant's bad character, or unless it is overly prejudicial under Fed. R. Evid. 403 or not relevant under Fed. R. Evid. 402." United States v. Pascarella, 84 F.3d 61, 69 (2d Cir. 1996) (internal citation omitted); see also United States v. Paulino, 445 F.3d 211, 221 (2d Cir. 2006); United States v. Z
is case are far removed from the "narrow" circumstances in which the Supreme Court has found an exception to the third party doctrine. For example, the Carpenter Court, while stressing that its holding was a "narrow one," 138 S. Ct. at 2220, held that "[g]iven the unique nature ofcell phone location records," which
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
the defendant's bad character, or unless it is overly prejudicial under Fed. R. Evid. 403 or not relevant under Fed. R. Evid. 402." United States v. Pascarella, 84 F.3d 61, 69 (2d Cir. 1996) (internal citation omitted); see also United States v. Paulino, 445 F.3d 211, 221 (2d Cir. 2006); United States v. Z
is case are far removed from the "narrow" circumstances in which the Supreme Court has found an exception to the third party doctrine. For example, the Carpenter Court, while stressing that its holding was a "narrow one," 138 S. Ct. at 2220, held that "[g]iven the unique nature of cell phone location records," whic
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
the defendant's bad character, or unless it is overly prejudicial under Fed. R. Evid. 403 or not relevant under Fed. R. Evid. 402." United States v. Pascarella, 84 F.3d 61, 69 (2d Cir. 1996) (internal citation omitted); see also United States v. Paulino, 445 F.3d 211, 221 (2d Cir. 2006); United States v. Z
is case are far removed from the "narrow" circumstances in which the Supreme Court has found an exception to the third party doctrine. For example, the Carpenter Court, while stressing that its holding was a "narrow one," 138 S. Ct. at 2220, held that "[g]iven the unique nature of cell phone location records," whic
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
the defendant's bad character, or unless it is overly prejudicial under Fed. R. Evid. 403 or not relevant under Fed. R. Evid. 402." United States v. Pascarella, 84 F.3d 61, 69 (2d Cir. 1996) (internal citation omitted); see also United States v. Paulin, 445 F.3d 211, 221 (2d Cir. 2006); United States v. Za
is case are far removed from the "narrow" circumstances in which the Supreme Court has found an exception to the third party doctrine. For example, the Carpenter Court, while stressing that its holding was a "narrow one," 138 S. Ct. at 2220, held that "[g]iven the unique nature of cell phone location records," whic
Sponsored
Mutual Connections (252)
Entities connected to both Pascarella and the Carpenter Court
SA
Salinas
PERSON12 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
United States
LOCATION12 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
CO
Concepcion
PERSON12 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
BE
Benussi
PERSON12 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
Figueroa
PERSON12 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON12 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
Southern District of New York
ORGANIZATION12 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON12 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
SL
Sliker
PERSON11 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
HU
Huddleston
PERSON11 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
MW
Martin Weinberg
PERSON10 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
Opportunity Equity Partners Ltd.
ORGANIZATION10 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
Productions, Inc.
ORGANIZATION10 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
Kendall Coffey
PERSON10 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
David Boies
PERSON10 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
Colorado
LOCATION10 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
Oregon
LOCATION10 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
Hastings
PERSON10 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
Jennings
PERSON10 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the
Supreme Court
ORGANIZATION10 w/ Pascarella·4 w/ the