{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "12 of 14",
    "document_number": "317",
    "date": "08/13/21",
    "document_type": "Court Document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 317 Filed 08/13/21 Page 12 of 14 contended specifically that the indictment is too vague because it refers to open-ended time periods for the Mann Act counts. The Court disagreed in light of Circuit precedent requiring only that an indictment describe the time and place of the charged conduct in \"approximate terms\" and permitting the use of \"on or about\" language to describe the window of when a violation occurred. Maxwell, 2021 WL 1518675, at *10 (citing Tramunti, 513 F.2d at 1113; United States v. Nersesian, 824 F.2d 1294, 1323 (2d Cir. 1987)). The Court explained that approximate time periods are particularly appropriate if the allegations involved ongoing conduct and especially if the indictment alleges sexual abuse against minor victims. Id. (citing United States v. Young, No. 08-cr-285 (KMK), 2008 WL 4178190, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 4, 2008)). Maxwell now again moves for a bill of particulars. Maxwell primarily argues that the S2 indictment does not provide specific dates for the conduct alleged with respect to the sex trafficking counts. Instead, the S2 indictment provides a four-year time period from 2001 to 2004 in which the alleged sex trafficking and sex trafficking conspiracy occurred. Maxwell's motion in this respect is denied for the same reasons stated in the Court's April 16, 2021 Opinion & Order. The indictment alleges ongoing conduct that involve the sexual abuse of minors with respect to counts five and six and therefore the approximate time period provided is sufficient. Accordingly, the motion for a bill of particulars is denied.1 VII. The current disclosure schedule for impeachment material is adequate Finally, Maxwell moves to compel the immediate disclosure of any of Minor Victim's prior statements in which she did not mention Maxwell, including prior statements made to the 1 Additionally, Maxwell includes in her motion for a bill of particulars a request to require the government to identify the unnamed co-conspirators who allegedly participated in the conspiracies charged in the S2 indictment. Maxwell also made this request in the parties' joint May 21, 2021 letter to the Court regarding the disclosure schedule. Dkt. No. 291. In both her motion and the May 21, 2021 letter, Maxwell requests that this information be disclosed to the defense at the same time that the Government discloses Jencks Act material. The Government has not opposed this request. In the absence 12 DOJ-OGR-00004986",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 317 Filed 08/13/21 Page 12 of 14",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "contended specifically that the indictment is too vague because it refers to open-ended time periods for the Mann Act counts. The Court disagreed in light of Circuit precedent requiring only that an indictment describe the time and place of the charged conduct in \"approximate terms\" and permitting the use of \"on or about\" language to describe the window of when a violation occurred. Maxwell, 2021 WL 1518675, at *10 (citing Tramunti, 513 F.2d at 1113; United States v. Nersesian, 824 F.2d 1294, 1323 (2d Cir. 1987)). The Court explained that approximate time periods are particularly appropriate if the allegations involved ongoing conduct and especially if the indictment alleges sexual abuse against minor victims. Id. (citing United States v. Young, No. 08-cr-285 (KMK), 2008 WL 4178190, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 4, 2008)). Maxwell now again moves for a bill of particulars. Maxwell primarily argues that the S2 indictment does not provide specific dates for the conduct alleged with respect to the sex trafficking counts. Instead, the S2 indictment provides a four-year time period from 2001 to 2004 in which the alleged sex trafficking and sex trafficking conspiracy occurred. Maxwell's motion in this respect is denied for the same reasons stated in the Court's April 16, 2021 Opinion & Order. The indictment alleges ongoing conduct that involve the sexual abuse of minors with respect to counts five and six and therefore the approximate time period provided is sufficient. Accordingly, the motion for a bill of particulars is denied.1",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "VII. The current disclosure schedule for impeachment material is adequate",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Finally, Maxwell moves to compel the immediate disclosure of any of Minor Victim's prior statements in which she did not mention Maxwell, including prior statements made to the",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 Additionally, Maxwell includes in her motion for a bill of particulars a request to require the government to identify the unnamed co-conspirators who allegedly participated in the conspiracies charged in the S2 indictment. Maxwell also made this request in the parties' joint May 21, 2021 letter to the Court regarding the disclosure schedule. Dkt. No. 291. In both her motion and the May 21, 2021 letter, Maxwell requests that this information be disclosed to the defense at the same time that the Government discloses Jencks Act material. The Government has not opposed this request. In the absence",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "12",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00004986",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Maxwell",
      "Tramunti",
      "Nersesian",
      "Young",
      "Minor Victim"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Court",
      "Government"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "S.D.N.Y."
    ],
    "dates": [
      "08/13/21",
      "2001",
      "2004",
      "April 16, 2021",
      "Sept. 4, 2008",
      "May 21, 2021"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 317",
      "Dkt. No. 291",
      "08-cr-285 (KMK)",
      "DOJ-OGR-00004986"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case United States v. Maxwell. The text is printed and there are no visible stamps or handwritten notes. The document is page 12 of 14."
}