mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES008/DOJ-OGR-00021651.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "4",
    "document_number": "79",
    "date": "06/29/2023",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 22-1426, Document 79, 06/29/2023, 3536060, Page4 of 93\niii\nPAGE\nii. Landgraf Step Two . . . . . . 37\n2. Section 3283 Reaches Counts Three and Four . . . . . . . . . . . . 42\na. Counts Three and Four Are Offenses Involving the Sexual Abuse of a Child . . . . . . . . . . . . 43\nb. Maxwell's Argument for Use of a Categorical Approach Lacks Merit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46\nPOINT III—The District Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion in Concluding that Juror 50 Could Be Fair and Impartial Notwithstanding His Inadvertent Mistakes on His Juror Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . 49\nA. Relevant Facts . . . . . . . . . . . . 50\n1. The Jury Selection Process . . . . . . . . . . . . 50\n2. Juror 50 . . . . . . . . . . . . 51\n3. The Hearing . . . . . . . . . . . . 53\n4. The District Court's Decision . . . . . . . . . . . . 55\nB. Applicable Law . . . . . . . . . . . . 56\nC. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . 59\nDOJ-OGR-00021651",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 22-1426, Document 79, 06/29/2023, 3536060, Page4 of 93",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "iii\nPAGE\nii. Landgraf Step Two . . . . . . 37\n2. Section 3283 Reaches Counts Three and Four . . . . . . . . . . . . 42\na. Counts Three and Four Are Offenses Involving the Sexual Abuse of a Child . . . . . . . . . . . . 43\nb. Maxwell's Argument for Use of a Categorical Approach Lacks Merit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46\nPOINT III—The District Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion in Concluding that Juror 50 Could Be Fair and Impartial Notwithstanding His Inadvertent Mistakes on His Juror Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . 49\nA. Relevant Facts . . . . . . . . . . . . 50\n1. The Jury Selection Process . . . . . . . . . . . . 50\n2. Juror 50 . . . . . . . . . . . . 51\n3. The Hearing . . . . . . . . . . . . 53\n4. The District Court's Decision . . . . . . . . . . . . 55\nB. Applicable Law . . . . . . . . . . . . 56\nC. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . 59",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00021651",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Maxwell",
      "Juror 50"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "District Court",
      "DOJ"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "06/29/2023"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "22-1426",
      "79",
      "3536060",
      "DOJ-OGR-00021651"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a case involving Maxwell. The content is a table of contents or index for a larger document, outlining various points and subsections related to the case. The document is well-formatted and legible."
}