mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES008/DOJ-OGR-00021042.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "216",
    "document_number": "58",
    "date": "02/28/2023",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 22-1426, Document 58, 02/28/2023, 3475901, Page216 of 221\nA-416\nM6SQmax1\n41\n1    (2017).\n2        Moreover, the defendant fails to prove that 4B1.5(b)\n3    was enacted only to prevent future danger to the public.\n4    Background commentary explains that aside from recidivism,\n5    Congress \"directed the Commission to ensure lengthy\n6    incarceration for offenders who engage in a pattern of activity\n7    involving the sexual abuse or exploitation of minors.\"  That's\n8    4B1.5 comment background.\n9        Further, the legislative history quoted by the\n10   defendant says that Congress increased Guidelines sentences for\n11   sexual abuse of minors \"to address the egregiousness of these\n12   crimes.\" And, in fact, the defendant's brief cites that I\n13   believe at 12.  Thus, I find no basis for a requirement that I\n14   must first find the defendant to be a public danger before\n15   applying the enhancement.  The defendant's remaining argument\n16   that applying this enhancement would result in an excessive\n17   sentence is appropriately considered as part of the defendant's\n18   request for a downward variance.\n19       Next the defendant objects to the application\n20   3B1.1(a), which we've discussed, which adds four offense levels\n21   for her leadership role in a criminal activity.  \"a court must\n22   make two specific factual findings before it can properly\n23   enhance a defendant's offense level under 3B1.1(a): (i) that\n24   the defendant was an organizer or leader; and (ii) that the\n25   criminal activity involved five or more participants or was\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00021042",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 22-1426, Document 58, 02/28/2023, 3475901, Page216 of 221",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A-416",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "M6SQmax1\n41\n1    (2017).\n2        Moreover, the defendant fails to prove that 4B1.5(b)\n3    was enacted only to prevent future danger to the public.\n4    Background commentary explains that aside from recidivism,\n5    Congress \"directed the Commission to ensure lengthy\n6    incarceration for offenders who engage in a pattern of activity\n7    involving the sexual abuse or exploitation of minors.\"  That's\n8    4B1.5 comment background.\n9        Further, the legislative history quoted by the\n10   defendant says that Congress increased Guidelines sentences for\n11   sexual abuse of minors \"to address the egregiousness of these\n12   crimes.\" And, in fact, the defendant's brief cites that I\n13   believe at 12.  Thus, I find no basis for a requirement that I\n14   must first find the defendant to be a public danger before\n15   applying the enhancement.  The defendant's remaining argument\n16   that applying this enhancement would result in an excessive\n17   sentence is appropriately considered as part of the defendant's\n18   request for a downward variance.\n19       Next the defendant objects to the application\n20   3B1.1(a), which we've discussed, which adds four offense levels\n21   for her leadership role in a criminal activity.  \"a court must\n22   make two specific factual findings before it can properly\n23   enhance a defendant's offense level under 3B1.1(a): (i) that\n24   the defendant was an organizer or leader; and (ii) that the\n25   criminal activity involved five or more participants or was",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00021042",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [],
    "organizations": [
      "Congress",
      "Commission",
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "2017",
      "02/28/2023"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "22-1426",
      "58",
      "3475901",
      "DOJ-OGR-00021042"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript or legal document. The text is mostly printed, with no visible handwriting or stamps. The footer contains a reference number 'DOJ-OGR-00021042' and the name of a reporting company 'SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.' with their phone number."
}