Epstein Secrets

h Cir. 1987) (discussing application of the rule in situations where "plea negotiations . . . broke down" and case went to trial); United States v. Gonzalez, 608 F.3d 1001 (7th Cir. 2010) cert. denied, 131 S. Ct. 952 (2011) (allowing use of plea discussions against a defendant who pleaded guilty because

0 applies in federal proceedings to statements made in connection with prior state pleas"); see also United States v. Holmes, 794 F.2d 345, 349 (8th Cir.1986) (permitting the admission of a guilty plea from state court in a federal proceeding). 2 Because Epstein's lawyers are claiming that the correspond

Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of the defendant SO ORDERED. .. is beneficial to him." Karl Elmer Forest Hills Corp. Gonzalez. IS9 A.D.2d 613. 553 N.Y.S.2d 22. 23 (2d Dept 1990). We hold that Epstein's check does not constitute a written promise to guarantee the remainder

e functional, its features may be copied even if conibsion would result. American Greetings Corp.'. Dan-Dee Onportit Ina, 807 F.2d 1136, 1141 (3d Cir.1986). FT states that its packaging design was chosen because the design was pretty, so- phisticated, and showed off the novelty value of the deodorant

is authorized engage under its com- merce power,"Gonzales Reich, 545U.S. I, ---, 125 S.Ct. 2195, 2205, 16

ely on the defendant's status as a U.S. cit- izen is firmly estallished by our precedent. See, e.g.. United States Walczak, 783 F.2d 852, 854 (9th Cir.1986) (holding that jurisdiction over a U.S. citizen who violated a federal statute while in Canada los proper under the nationality principle); McKee!

s and Perez. FN5. Castaneda told the government that he was approached by Julio Gonzalez in 1992 for assistance in getting his DWI case reduced. Gonzalez gave Castaneda $1,000 to pass on to Weaver as payment for the fix. Castaneda acknowledged keep- ing approximately $100 for himself. FN6. Castane

allis, 28 F.3d 1399, 1409 (5th Cir.1994); United States v. Fitch, 964 F.2d 571, 574 (6th Cir.1992); United Stales v. Brown, 801 F.2d 352, 354 (8th Cir.1986). F1418. United States v. Tilley, 964 F.2d 66, 70 (Id Cir.1992) FN19. Dallis, 28 F.3d at 1409; Tilley, 964 F.2d at 70; United States v. Crawford,