{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "4",
    "document_number": "109-1",
    "date": "09/17/2024",
    "document_type": "Court Document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "of three years, three years, and five years, respectively. The District Court also imposed a fine of $250,000 on each count for a total of $750,000.\n\nOn appeal, the questions presented are (1) whether Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (\"NPA\") with the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (\"USAO-SDFL\") barred Maxwell's prosecution by the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (\"USAO-SDNY\"); (2) whether Maxwell's second superseding indictment of March 29, 2021 (the \"Indictment\") complied with the statute of limitations; (3) whether the District Court abused its discretion in denying Maxwell's Rule 33 motion for a new trial based on the claimed violation of her Sixth Amendment right to a fair and impartial jury; (4) whether the District Court's response to a jury note resulted in a constructive amendment of, or prejudicial variance from, the allegations in the Indictment; and (5) whether Maxwell's sentence was procedurally reasonable.\n\nWe hold that Epstein's NPA did not bar Maxwell's prosecution by USAO-SDNY as the NPA does not bind USAO-SDNY. We hold that Maxwell's Indictment complied with the statute of limitations as 18 U.S.C. § 3283 extended the time to bring charges of sexual abuse for offenses committed before the date of the statute's enactment. We further hold that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in denying Maxwell's Rule 33 motion for a new trial based on one juror's erroneous answers during voir dire. We also hold that the District Court's response to a jury note did not result in a constructive amendment of, or prejudicial variance from, the allegations in the",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "of three years, three years, and five years, respectively. The District Court also imposed a fine of $250,000 on each count for a total of $750,000.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "On appeal, the questions presented are (1) whether Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (\"NPA\") with the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (\"USAO-SDFL\") barred Maxwell's prosecution by the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (\"USAO-SDNY\"); (2) whether Maxwell's second superseding indictment of March 29, 2021 (the \"Indictment\") complied with the statute of limitations; (3) whether the District Court abused its discretion in denying Maxwell's Rule 33 motion for a new trial based on the claimed violation of her Sixth Amendment right to a fair and impartial jury; (4) whether the District Court's response to a jury note resulted in a constructive amendment of, or prejudicial variance from, the allegations in the Indictment; and (5) whether Maxwell's sentence was procedurally reasonable.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "We hold that Epstein's NPA did not bar Maxwell's prosecution by USAO-SDNY as the NPA does not bind USAO-SDNY. We hold that Maxwell's Indictment complied with the statute of limitations as 18 U.S.C. § 3283 extended the time to bring charges of sexual abuse for offenses committed before the date of the statute's enactment. We further hold that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in denying Maxwell's Rule 33 motion for a new trial based on one juror's erroneous answers during voir dire. We also hold that the District Court's response to a jury note did not result in a constructive amendment of, or prejudicial variance from, the allegations in the",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "4",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00000005",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Jeffrey Epstein",
      "Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida",
      "United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York",
      "District Court"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Florida",
      "New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "March 29, 2021",
      "09/17/2024"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "22-1426",
      "109-1",
      "3634097",
      "DOJ-OGR-00000005",
      "18 U.S.C. § 3283"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court document related to the case of Maxwell, with references to legal statutes and proceedings. The text is mostly printed, with no visible handwriting or stamps. The document is well-formatted and legible."
}