Epstein Secrets

Acosta, DEF: Kenneth Starr, Jay Lefkowitz, Lilly Sanchez). EFTA01718570 9/12/2007--Meeting (US: and , DEF: Jay Lefkowitz, Gerald Lefcourt and Jack Goldberger, STATE OF FLORIDA: Barry Krisher and Lanna Belohlavek). 9/18/2007--Rescheduled date for computer hearing.(Hearing initially set for 9/13/2007). 9

7. cc: The Honorable Sandra McSorley AITEREDRY, GOLDBERGER eb WEISS, P.A. Beech, Flori 33401 JA A LDBER

ee also United States v. Root, 296 F.3d 1222, 1227- 28 (I11° Cir. 2002); United States v. Sims. 428 F.3d 945, 959 (10th Cir. 2005); United States v. Helder, 452 F.3d 751 (8th Cir. 2006); United States v. Meek, 366 F.3d 705, 717- 20 (9th Cir. 2004). There arc approximately two dozen Eleventh Circuit case

arey had on June 1, 2006, with ASA regarding a meeting earlier that day between representatives of the State Attorney's Office and defense attorney Jack Goldberger (Police Report at 87). Omitted are the facts of the meeting (Police Report at 87): In addition to the presence of other defense counsel, there was i

tate Attorney's Office and defense attorney Jack Goldberger (Police Report at 87). Omitted are the facts of t

es1 Sims, 428 F.3d 945, 959 0th Cir. dealing with a minor was sufficient to make out the crime. See United States Root, 296 2005); United States I Helder, 452 F.3d 751 (8Ih Or. 2006); United States I Meek, 366 F.3d 705, 717-20 (0 Cir. 2004). Likewise, the Circuits have rejected void or vagueness, ove

(March 5, 2008) Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida Before DUBINA and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges, and GOLDBERG,* Judge. DUBINA, Circuit Judge:DUBINA, Circuit Judge: Appellant Donald J. Deverso ("Deverso") ap- peals his convictions for possessing materials in

t 756. In Hicks, we extended that reasoning to § 2423(b)'s prohibition of travel with intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct. 457 F.3d at 841. Helder and Hicks control here, and apply with equal force to the third statute under which Spurlock was convicted: attempt to know- ingly transfer obscen

tual minor must be involved, the govern- ment proved no violation of federal law. This argument is foreclosed by our deci- sions in United States v. Helder, 452 F.3d 751 (8th Cir.2006), and United States v. Hicks, 457 FM 838 (8th Cir2006). In Heftier, we concluded that an actual minor victim is not r

33401 this 7* day of December. 2007. ATIERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite

ee also United States v. Root, 296 F.3d 1222, 1227- 28 (11'h Cir. 2002); United States v. Sims, 428 F.3d 945, 959 (10°' Cir. 2005); United States v. Helder, 452 F.3d 751 (8° Cir. 2006); United States v. Meek, 366 F.3d 705, 717- 20 (9°' Cir. 2004). There are approximately two dozen Eleventh Circuit race