DOJ-OGR-00000433.jpg
625 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
1
Organizations
3
Locations
4
Events
0
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
625 KB
Summary
This document is page 3 of a legal filing addressed to Judge Richard M. Berman, dated July 16, 2019. The author argues that denying bail to a defendant based on their wealth is unconstitutional, violating the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments by thwarting the presumption of innocence and due process. The document cites several federal court cases as precedent to support the claim that suitable conditions for release can be found even in presumption cases.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Richard M. Berman | Honorable (likely a Judge) |
Addressed at the top of the document.
|
| Brinson | Defendant |
Mentioned in the case citation 'US v. Brinson'.
|
| Afyare | Defendant |
Mentioned in the case citation 'US v. Afyare'.
|
| Gardner | Defendant |
Mentioned in the case citation 'US v. Gardner'.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| US | government |
Appears as the plaintiff in several case citations (e.g., 'US v. Brinson').
|
Timeline (4 events)
Locations (3)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned in a case citation as the location of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma.
|
|
|
Mentioned in a case citation as the location of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee.
|
|
|
Mentioned in a case citation as the location of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
|
Key Quotes (2)
"[s]ubject to rebuttal,"Source
— unspecified legal text
(Quoted to describe a legal presumption regarding bail.)
DOJ-OGR-00000433.jpg
Quote #1
"least restrictive"Source
— unspecified legal text
(Quoted to describe the type of conditions under which bail should be mandated.)
DOJ-OGR-00000433.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,336 characters)
Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 22 Filed 07/16/19 Page 3 of 9
Hon. Richard M. Berman
July 16, 2019
Page 3
July 16, 2019
Page 3
plain text – expressly providing that the presumption is “[s]ubject to rebuttal,” and otherwise mandating bail on the “least restrictive” conditions that reasonably assure the defendant’s presence and community safety – on its head. It defies legislative intent. It thwarts the presumption of innocence. And it violates the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth amendment rights to due process, counsel, a defense and equal protection, not to mention the Eighth Amendment guarantee of bail – all based on a suspect if not invidious classification. To be sure, wealthy defendants do not deserve preferential treatment. But they certainly shouldn’t be singled out for worse treatment – in effect, categorically disqualified from bail, at least in a presumption case – on the basis of their net worth.
Second, it bears emphasis that the presumption is hardly an insurmountable bar to release in a § 1591 prosecution.3 To the contrary, courts have determined that there are suitable conditions under which
3 E.g., US v. Brinson, No. 13-CR-04-GKF, 2013 WL 11305792 (N.D. Okla. Feb. 8, 2013); US v. Afyare, No. 3:10-cr-00260, 2011 WL 1397820 (M.D. Tenn. April 13, 2011); US v. Gardner, 523 F. Supp. 2d 1025 (N.D. Cal. 2007).
DOJ-OGR-00000433
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document