mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES002/DOJ-OGR-00003074.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "140",
    "document_number": "204",
    "date": "04/16/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 Filed 04/16/21 Page 140 of 239\n\nhearing requires \"an affidavit of someone with personal knowledge of the underlying facts.\" United States v. Shaw, 260 F. Supp. 2d 567, 570 (E.D.N.Y. 2003); see also United States v. Gillette, 383 F.2d 843, 848 (2d Cir. 1967); United States v. Ahmad, 992 F. Supp. 682, 685 (S.D.N.Y. 1998) (\"ordinarily [a factual issue must be] raised by an affidavit of a person with personal knowledge of the facts;\" otherwise \"there is no basis for holding an evidentiary hearing or suppressing the evidence\").\n\nThe defendant's allegations are analogous to those raised when evaluating defendants' claims of Government Franks violations. To obtain a Franks hearing, a defendant must make a \"substantial preliminary showing,\" United States v. Falso, 544 F.3d 110, 125 (2d Cir. 2008) (quoting Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 155-56 (1978)), that (i) there were \"inaccuracies or omissions\" in the affidavit, (ii) \"the alleged falsehoods or omissions were necessary to the issuing judge's probable cause or necessity finding,\" and (iii) \"the claimed inaccuracies or omissions [were] the result of the affiant's deliberate falsehood or reckless disregard for the truth.\" Lambus, 897 F.3d at 397; see also United States v. Awadallah, 349 F.3d 42, 64 (2d Cir. 2003). Even if a defendant clears the first Franks hurdle with a substantial preliminary showing of a false statement or omission, the defendant is not entitled to a Franks hearing unless a reviewing court makes the legal determination that the false statement or omission was \"necessary to the [issuing] judge's probable cause finding.\" United States v. Canfield, 212 F.3d 713, 718 (2d Cir. 2000).\n\nTo determine whether alleged errors and omissions are material, a court should revise the affidavit (adding alleged omissions and correcting alleged errors), and determine whether the revised affidavit supports a finding of probable cause. See, e.g., Canfield, 212 F.3d at 719. If the revised affidavit supports a probable cause finding, then \"the inaccuracies were not material to the probable cause determination and suppression is inappropriate.\" Id. at 718. After adding the\n\n113\n\nDOJ-OGR-00003074",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 Filed 04/16/21 Page 140 of 239",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "hearing requires \"an affidavit of someone with personal knowledge of the underlying facts.\" United States v. Shaw, 260 F. Supp. 2d 567, 570 (E.D.N.Y. 2003); see also United States v. Gillette, 383 F.2d 843, 848 (2d Cir. 1967); United States v. Ahmad, 992 F. Supp. 682, 685 (S.D.N.Y. 1998) (\"ordinarily [a factual issue must be] raised by an affidavit of a person with personal knowledge of the facts;\" otherwise \"there is no basis for holding an evidentiary hearing or suppressing the evidence\").",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The defendant's allegations are analogous to those raised when evaluating defendants' claims of Government Franks violations. To obtain a Franks hearing, a defendant must make a \"substantial preliminary showing,\" United States v. Falso, 544 F.3d 110, 125 (2d Cir. 2008) (quoting Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 155-56 (1978)), that (i) there were \"inaccuracies or omissions\" in the affidavit, (ii) \"the alleged falsehoods or omissions were necessary to the issuing judge's probable cause or necessity finding,\" and (iii) \"the claimed inaccuracies or omissions [were] the result of the affiant's deliberate falsehood or reckless disregard for the truth.\" Lambus, 897 F.3d at 397; see also United States v. Awadallah, 349 F.3d 42, 64 (2d Cir. 2003). Even if a defendant clears the first Franks hurdle with a substantial preliminary showing of a false statement or omission, the defendant is not entitled to a Franks hearing unless a reviewing court makes the legal determination that the false statement or omission was \"necessary to the [issuing] judge's probable cause finding.\" United States v. Canfield, 212 F.3d 713, 718 (2d Cir. 2000).",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "To determine whether alleged errors and omissions are material, a court should revise the affidavit (adding alleged omissions and correcting alleged errors), and determine whether the revised affidavit supports a finding of probable cause. See, e.g., Canfield, 212 F.3d at 719. If the revised affidavit supports a probable cause finding, then \"the inaccuracies were not material to the probable cause determination and suppression is inappropriate.\" Id. at 718. After adding the",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "113",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00003074",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [],
    "organizations": [
      "United States",
      "Government"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Delaware",
      "New York (E.D.N.Y.)",
      "New York (S.D.N.Y.)"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "04/16/21",
      "1967",
      "1978",
      "1998",
      "2000",
      "2003",
      "2008"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 204",
      "260 F. Supp. 2d 567",
      "383 F.2d 843",
      "992 F. Supp. 682",
      "544 F.3d 110",
      "438 U.S. 154",
      "897 F.3d 397",
      "349 F.3d 42",
      "212 F.3d 713",
      "DOJ-OGR-00003074"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case, with references to various legal precedents and statutes. The text is mostly printed, with no visible handwriting or stamps. The document is likely a page from a larger filing, given the page number and document number in the header."
}