Epstein Secrets

died." C. Wright, Fed- eral Practice and rocedure: Criminal 2d § 769. See Stack Boyle, 342 U.S. 1, I1, 72 S.Ct. 1, 6, 96 L. . 1 ( 51) (opinion of Jackson, J.); Fernandez United States, 81 S.Ct. 642, 5 L. .2d 683 (1961) (opinion of Circuit Justice Harlan) ("District courts have authority as an

ent status from presumed innocence and release on bail prior thereto. The statute recognizes the different status. The defendant in United States' Zannino, 761 F.2d 52 (1st Cir.1985), was admitted C 2008 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. https://web2.westlaw.com/print/printstream.aspx

n under the prior Bail Reform Act of 1966, bail terms were "subject to review when changed circumstances require that the release be reappraised." Zannino, supra, at 55. The Court cited 18 U.S.C. § 3146(e), repealed by18 U.S.C. § 3142(c), which reads in part: A judicial officer ordering the release

d 944) merely procedural will result in the same trivialization of premature incarceration of accused persons prior to trial. I hold with Justice Jackson who, sitting as a circuit justice, said: It is difficult to reconcile with traditional American law the jailing of persons by the courts because

px?utid=%7bFEDF5709-3AEA-4F74-8619-... 4/10/2008 EFTA00191689 Page 1 of 10 w estlaw 761 F.2d 52 761 F.2d 52 (Cite as: 761 F.2d 52) H U.S. II. Zannino C.A. (Mass.),1985. United States Court of Appeals,First Cir- cuit. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. Ilario M.A. ZANNINO, Defe

nd six others. The charges related to murders, gambling, and other illegal acts. When first brought be- fore the magistrate on September 20, 1983, Zannino was ordered held without bail on the grounds that no conditions of pretrial release would reasonably assure his ap- pearance at trial. Eventually,

nderlying the orderly prosecution *237 and defense of legal claims.' Id., at 510, 67 S.Ct., at 393; see also id., at 514515? 67 S.Ct., at 395-396 (Jackson, J., concumng). As the Court there observed: 'Historically, a lawyer is an officer of the court and is bound to work for the ad- vancement of just

government has neither argued for a narrow waiver nor identified any particular document to which such a waive! might extend. See United States . Zannino, 895 F.2d 1, 17 (1st Cir. 990) (explaining that arguments not made in • a party's bnefs need not be considered). 120] Viewed against this backdro