{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "8",
    "document_number": "53",
    "date": "09/03/19",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 53 Filed 09/03/19 Page 8 of 86 8 J8RsEPS1 the court's responsibility, and manifestly within its purview, to ensure that the victims in this case are treated fairly and with dignity. The fundamental substantive principle which applies in considering the government's motion is termed the rule of abatement. This principle originated in the English common law. It was adopted by most U.S. federal courts, but more recently, it has faced some appropriate criticism. The rule of abatement is best explained in the Second Circuit case of U.S. v. Wright. In that Wright case, two defendants had pled guilty to embezzlement and tax evasion. Both defendants appealed, but one of the defendants died while his appeal was pending in the Second Circuit. The Court of Appeals rule that under the rule of abatement, the judgment of conviction against the deceased defendant was required to be vacated and the indictment was to be dismissed. The Wright court held that when a convicted defendant dies while his direct appeal as of right is pending, his death abates not only the appeal, but also proceedings had during the course of the prosecution. The Second Circuit incidentally has also held that when a criminal conviction abates upon the death of a defendant, any restitution ordered as a result of that conviction must also abate, and it is also ruled the same with respect to associated forfeiture orders. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00000646",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 53 Filed 09/03/19 Page 8 of 86 8",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "J8RsEPS1 the court's responsibility, and manifestly within its purview, to ensure that the victims in this case are treated fairly and with dignity. The fundamental substantive principle which applies in considering the government's motion is termed the rule of abatement. This principle originated in the English common law. It was adopted by most U.S. federal courts, but more recently, it has faced some appropriate criticism. The rule of abatement is best explained in the Second Circuit case of U.S. v. Wright. In that Wright case, two defendants had pled guilty to embezzlement and tax evasion. Both defendants appealed, but one of the defendants died while his appeal was pending in the Second Circuit. The Court of Appeals rule that under the rule of abatement, the judgment of conviction against the deceased defendant was required to be vacated and the indictment was to be dismissed. The Wright court held that when a convicted defendant dies while his direct appeal as of right is pending, his death abates not only the appeal, but also proceedings had during the course of the prosecution. The Second Circuit incidentally has also held that when a criminal conviction abates upon the death of a defendant, any restitution ordered as a result of that conviction must also abate, and it is also ruled the same with respect to associated forfeiture orders.",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00000646",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [],
    "organizations": [
      "U.S. federal courts",
      "Second Circuit",
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.",
      "DOJ"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "09/03/19"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:19-cr-00490-RMB",
      "53",
      "DOJ-OGR-00000646"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing with a clear and legible text. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}