Epstein Secrets

Unpublished Internet Internet chat room; evidence clear defendant believed he was communicating with "minor"; attempted to entice her to fly to Hawaii to have sex; defendant claimed entrapment. Affirmed. 2422(b); 2423(b) Not Consummated Sling U.S. I Curtin, 443 F.3d 1084 (9° Cir. 2006) Int

ppeal dismissed due to waiver of right to appeal. 2422(b) Not Consummated Sting 51 EFTA00224185 FACILITY FACTS/COMMUNICATION CHARGE- U.S. I Searcy, 418 F.3d 1193 (11th Cir. 2005) Internet Internet chat room; defendant's screen name was "Obesseddad11"; informed undercover agent that he was

Unpublished Internet Internet chat room; evidence clear defendant believed he was communicating with "minor"; attempted to entice her to fly to Hawaii to have sex; defendant claimed entrapment. Affirmed. 2422(6); 2423(b) Not Consummated s tin U.S. v. Nisely, 172 Fed. Appx. 713 (9th Cir. 2006)

onsummated Sting 49 EFTA01729533 : COultir -: . ‘• CASES-; - 1 . • • -. - :,FACILITY i:PACtSICOMNIT:ThlICAPON- 'CHAR0g t• U.S. v. Searcy, 418 F.3d 1193 (1 l'h Cir. Internet Internet chat room; defendant's screen name was "Obesseddadl I"; informed 2422(b) Sting 2005) undercover

Unpublished Internet Internet chat room; evidence clear defendant believed he was communicating with "minor"; attempted to entice her to fly to Hawaii to have sex; defendant claimed entrapment. Affirmed. 2422(b); 2423(b) Not Consummated Sting U.S. v. Nicely, 172 Fed. Appx. 713 (9th Cir. 2006)

due to waiver of right to appeal. 2422(b) Not Consummated Sting 49 EFTA00079462 COURT CASES FACILITy FACTS/COMMUNICATION CHARGE U.S. v. Searcy. Internet Internet chat room; defendant's screen 2422(14 418 F.3d 1193 (11th Cir. Sting name was "Obesseddadl I"; informed undercover agent th

Unpublished Internet Internet chat room; evidence clear defendant believed he was communicating with "minor"; attempted to entice her to fly to Hawaii to have sex; defendant claimed entrapment. Affirmed. 2422(b); 2423(b) Not Consummated Sting U.S.. Curtin, 443 F.3d 1084 (9i° Cir. 2006) Int

ICO One defendant sentenced to 40 yrs; other to 30 yrs. Affirmed. 53 EFTA00226343 COURT dale ' FACILITY FACTS/COMMUNICATION CHARGE"-•r. US I Searcy, Inter . et Internet chat room; defendant's screen 2422(b) 418 F.3d 1193 (11th Cir. 2005) Sting name was "Obesseddad11"; informed undercover

rts concluded that a victim of uncharged conduct should not be afforded statutory protections.'°! Yet none of these cases—United States v. Turner,'°? Searcy v. Paletz,'® or Searcy v. Skinner'°*—provide strong support for OLC’s position. Turner is a particularly poor fit. Although OLC’s memorandum characte

hts if counts are dismissed.**° Arizona courts have also permitted victims to invoke their rights in the context of civil forfeiture proceedings.”*! Hawaii’s victims’ rights statute illustrates how a state has defined the term “case” more expansively than the limited definition advocated by the Departmen

that a victim of uncharged conduct should not be afforded statutory protections. !°! Yet none of these cases - United States v. 10 104 Turner, !9? Searcy v. Paletz, !°3 or Searcy v. Skinner - provide strong support for OLC's position. Turner is a particularly 9 See 42 U.S.C. § 10607(c). % Td. § 10607(

s if counts are dismissed. 73° Arizona courts have also permitted victims to invoke their rights in the context of civil forfeiture proceedings. 73! Hawaii's victims’ rights statute illustrates how a state has defined the term "case" more expansively than the limited definition advocated by the Departmen