| 12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546 |
- {
- "document_metadata": {
- "page_number": "2",
- "document_number": "59",
- "date": "02/28/2023",
- "document_type": "Table of Contents",
- "has_handwriting": false,
- "has_stamps": false
- },
- "full_text": "Case 22-1426, Document 59, 02/28/2023, 3475902, Page2 of 113\n\nTABLE OF CONTENTS\n\nPage\nTABLE OF AUTHORITIES ...............................................................................................................................v\nSTATEMENT OF SUBJECT MATTER AND APPELLATE JURISDICTION .......................................................1\nSTATEMENT OF THE ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW ........................................................................2\nSTATEMENT OF THE CASE..........................................................................................................................4\nA. The Trial ..............................................................................................................................................6\nSUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ..................................................................................................................8\nINTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................11\nPOINT I\nALL COUNTS SHOULD BE DISMISSED PURSUANT TO THE NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT ...............13\nA. The NPA ............................................................................................................................................13\nB. Appellant may enforce the NPA as a third-party beneficiary...............................................................16\nC. The \"potential co-conspirators\" provision binds the USAO-SDNY, and Annabi is not to the contrary ........16\n1. Introduction...................................................................................................................................16\n2. Annabi does not apply because the NPA was negotiated and entered into outside of the Second Circuit .......................................................................................................................................................25\n3. Annabi does not apply to Count Six because that count falls wholly within the timeframe contemplated by the NPA...............................................................................................................................30\n4. There is affirmative indication that the NPA binds the USAO-SDNY .......................................................33\n5. If it is reasonable to conduct a hearing, then Annabi is a tiebreaker that only applies if ambiguity remains after the hearing ...............................................................................................................................38\ni\nDOJ-OGR-00021049",
- "text_blocks": [
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "TABLE OF CONTENTS",
- "position": "header"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ...............................................................................................................................v\nSTATEMENT OF SUBJECT MATTER AND APPELLATE JURISDICTION .......................................................1\nSTATEMENT OF THE ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW ........................................................................2\nSTATEMENT OF THE CASE..........................................................................................................................4\nA. The Trial ..............................................................................................................................................6\nSUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ..................................................................................................................8\nINTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................11\nPOINT I\nALL COUNTS SHOULD BE DISMISSED PURSUANT TO THE NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT ...............13\nA. The NPA ............................................................................................................................................13\nB. Appellant may enforce the NPA as a third-party beneficiary...............................................................16\nC. The \"potential co-conspirators\" provision binds the USAO-SDNY, and Annabi is not to the contrary ........16\n1. Introduction...................................................................................................................................16\n2. Annabi does not apply because the NPA was negotiated and entered into outside of the Second Circuit .......................................................................................................................................................25\n3. Annabi does not apply to Count Six because that count falls wholly within the timeframe contemplated by the NPA...............................................................................................................................30\n4. There is affirmative indication that the NPA binds the USAO-SDNY .......................................................33\n5. If it is reasonable to conduct a hearing, then Annabi is a tiebreaker that only applies if ambiguity remains after the hearing ...............................................................................................................................38",
- "position": "main content"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "DOJ-OGR-00021049",
- "position": "footer"
- }
- ],
- "entities": {
- "people": [],
- "organizations": [
- "USAO-SDNY"
- ],
- "locations": [
- "Second Circuit"
- ],
- "dates": [
- "02/28/2023"
- ],
- "reference_numbers": [
- "22-1426",
- "59",
- "3475902"
- ]
- },
- "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a table of contents for a legal brief. The text is clear and legible, with no visible redactions or damage."
- }
|