Epstein Secrets

ted to and appropriately joined with underlying 7 EFTA00091885 substantive crimes when the false declarations "concern the substantive offenses." Potamitis, 739 F.2d at 791. Such cases typically involve situations where the defendant was aware that he was being investigated and either lied to the grand

e statements underlying the Perjury Counts therefore do not "concern" the Mann Act Counts and cannot be joined as part of a "common scheme or plan." Potamitis, 739 F.2d at 791. The government makes only a half-hearted, and ineffective, attempt to allege a connection between the Perjury Counts and the Man

620 F.2d at 926). Offenses are "connected" or part of a "common scheme or plan" if the counts "grow out of related transactions." United States v. Randazzo, 80 F.3d 623, 627 (1st Cir. 1996). By contrast, offenses are not "connected" and joinder is inappropriate when "[c]ommission of one of the offenses

dly made a materially false statement that relates directly to the underlying crime and the crime is temporally related to the false statement. The Potamitis case that the government relies upon primarily for this proposition is a good example. In that case, the defendant was charged with making false st

ion of justice because he lied to the FBI agents and the Grand Jury about the underlying crimes for which he was being investigated and questioned. Potamitis, 739 F.2d at 786-87; see also United States v. Ruiz, 894 F.2d 501 (2d Cir. 1992) (common plan or scheme between lying on a non- profit's loan applic

1992) 4 United States v. Littlefield, 840 F.2d 143 (1st Cir. 1988) 6 United States v. Potamitis, 739 F.2d 784 (2d Cir. 1984) 3 United States v. Randazzo, 80 F.3d 623 (1st Cir. 1996) 2 United States v. Ruiz, 894 F.2d 501 (2d Cir.1990) I, 3 United States v. Sweig, 441 F.2d 114 (2d Cir. 1971) 3 Uni

dly made a materially false statement that relates directly to the underlying crime and the crime is temporally related to the false statement. The Potamitis case that the government relies upon primarily for this proposition is a good example. In that case, the defendant was charged with making false st

ion of justice because he lied to the FBI agents and the Grand Jury about the underlying crimes for which he was being investigated and questioned. Potamitis, 739 F.2d at 786-87; see also United States v. Ruiz, 894 F.2d 501 (2d Cir. 1992) (common plan or scheme between lying on a non- profit's loan applic

1992) 4 United States v. Littlefield, 840 F.2d 143 (1st Cir. 1988) 6 United States v. Potamitis, 739 F.2d 784 (2d Cir. 1984) 3 United States v. Randazzo, 80 F.3d 623 (1st Cir. 1996) 2 United States v. Ruiz, 894 F.2d 501 (2d Cir.1990) I, 3 United States v. Sweig, 441 F.2d 114 (2d Cir. 1971) 3 Uni