597.pdf

Type: pdf
Source set: house-oversight-doj
Pages: 5
Text status: Searchable text available
OCR confidence: 0.941592032365111

Extracted text

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document597 _ Filed 02/11/22 Pagelof5 USDC SDNY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOCUMENT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: DATE FILED: 2/11/22 United States of America, _y— 20-CR-330 (AJN) Ghislaine Maxwell, ORDER Defendant. ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge: The Court’s chambers received the attached letter via email from counsel for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) seeking leave to file an amicus brief regarding the Defendant’s motion for a new trial. The Court issues this Order in response. If any party wishes to file an amicus brief concerning the Defendant’s motion for a new trial, it may submit to the Court via email a motion for leave to do so on or before February 18, 2022. The Court will only consider such a motion if: 1) It is timely submitted by February 18, 2022; 2) It is submitted by counsel admitted to practice in the Southern District of New York; 3) It indicates whether the Government and the Defendant each either consents to or opposes the motion; and 4) States the interest of the potential amicus and why the additional memorandum of law would aid this Court’s evaluation of the Defendant’s new trial motion. If the motion for leave to file meets those requirements, the Court will docket the motion and rule on it. Any motion that does not meet those requirements will not be considered by the Court nor docketed. If any motion for leave to file an amicus brief is granted, the party will be 1 DOJ-OGR-00008916

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document597 Filed 02/11/22 Page2of5 permitted to file an amicus brief not exceeding 10 double-spaced pages. Any authorized amicus brief must be emailed to the Court for docketing within one week of the Court’s granting of the motion for leave to file. The Court provides one note of caution regarding timing. As of Wednesday, February 9, 2022, the Defendant’s motion for a new trial became fully briefed. Although the timing of the Court’s ruling on the…

Open in the interactive archive →