Epstein Secrets

attorneys. Supplemental Declaration of A. Marie Villafana, Dec. 22, 2008, doe. #35 at 2-3. 49. On July 11,

ein's attorneys. Supplemental Declaration of A. Marie Villafana, Dec. 22, 2008, doe. #35 at 2-3. 49. On July 11,

tter for some time. Indeed, the Government sent notice to Petitioner more than a year ago that 'your case is under investigation?' See Letter from A. Marie Villafatia to C.W. at 2 (June 7, 2007) (attached to Governmen'.'s Response) (emphasis added). The notice went on to tell Petitioner that "as a victim and/or w

on facts of this case; "defendant is not entitled to specific performance in this case because such action would violate the laws of this stale"); Ex parte Rich, 194 S.W.3d 508 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006); (where "the plea bargain seemed fair on us face when executed, it has become unenforceable due to circumstan

attorneys. Supplemental Declaration of A. Marie Villafana, Dec. 22, 2008, doc. #35 at 2-3. 49. On July II,

riminal defense counsel Jay Lefkowitz), and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida, represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney A. Marie Villafafia and others. The plea discussions generally began from the premise that Epstein would plead guilty to at least one federal felony offense surrounding

ein's attorneys. Supplemental Declaration of A. Marie Villafana, Dec. 22, 2008, doc. #35 at 2-3. 49. On July II,

on facts of this case; "defendant is not entitled to specific performance in this case because such action would violate the laws of this state"); Ex parte Rich, 194 S.W.3d 508, 515 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006); (where "the plea bargain seemed fair on its face when executed, it has become unenforceable due to cir

riminal defense counsel Jay Lefkowitz), and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida, represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney A. Marie Villafana and others. The plea discussions generally began from the premise that Epstein would plead guilty to at least one federal felony offense surrounding

11 Page 42 of 42 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The foregoing document was served on March 21, 2011, on the following using the Court's CM/ECF system: A. Marie Villafafta Assistant U.S. Attorney 500 S. Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561) 820-8711 Fax: (561) 820-8777 E-mail: ann.marie,c,vill

represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney A. Marie Villafana and others. The plea discussions generally began

on facts of this case; "defendant is not entitled to specific performance in this case because such action would violate the laws of this state"); Ex parte Rich, 194 S.W.3d 508, 515 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006); (where "the plea bargain seemed fair on its face when executed, it has become unenforceable due to cir

the past six months. We will leave it to your discretion as to whether this should be brought to the Court's attention. Epstein Agrmt001.pdf it Marie Villafaila Assistant U.S. Attorney 500 S. Australian Ave. Suite 400 West Palm Beach. Ft. 33401 Tracking: 713 08-80736-CV-MARRA RFP WPB-001857 EFTA001850

(VRAF(-13) Prom: Sent; To: Co: Subject: Ann Merle our two client names ere. 2. Ted Leopold tTleopokkanechaw.00mi Thuriutny, Jul.008 4:28 PM Villafana, Ann (USAPL8) Spencer Kuvin RØ; Epstein Investigation If you need any other trtformstion please lel me know. Ted i € -,---Ortglnal Message—

on facts of this case; "defendant is not entitled to specific performance in this case because such action would violate the laws of this state"); Ex parte Rich, 194 S.W.3d 508, 515 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006); (where "the plea bargain seemed fair on its face when executed, it has become unenforceable due to cir

puty Chief, Northern Region), and AUSA Anna Marie Villafana. Mr. Epstein retained counsel with expertise in

Jeffrey Sloman (First Assistant U.S. Attorney), Matthew Menchel (Chief, Criminal Division), Andrew Lourie (Deputy Chief, Northern Region), and AUSA Anna Marie Villafana. Mr. Epstein retained counsel with expertise in federal law and federal jurisdiction, including a former federal appellate judge, a former United S

State v. Wall, 348 N.C. 671 (1998) (holding that court cannot enforce a plea agreement for concurrent sentence where law mandated consecutive one); Ex parte Rich, 194 S.W.3d 508, 515 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (court cannot enforce an illegal sentence below the statutory range; remedy was for defendant to withdr