DOJ-OGR-00000004.json 4.0 KB

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778
  1. {
  2. "document_metadata": {
  3. "page_number": "3",
  4. "document_number": "109-1",
  5. "date": "09/17/2024",
  6. "document_type": "Court Document",
  7. "has_handwriting": false,
  8. "has_stamps": false
  9. },
  10. "full_text": "Case 22-1426, Document 109-1, 09/17/2024, 3634097, Page3 of 26\n\nANDREW ROHRBACH, Assistant United States Attorney (Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, Won S. Shin, Assistant United States Attorneys, on the brief), for Damian Williams, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, New York, NY, for Appellee.\n\nDIANA FABI SAMSON (Arthur L. Aidala, John M. Leventhal, on the brief), Aidala Bertuna & Kamins PC, New York, NY, for Defendant-Appellant.\n\nJOSÉ A. CABRANES, Circuit Judge:\n\nDefendant Ghislaine Maxwell appeals her June 29, 2022, judgment of conviction in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Alison J. Nathan, Judge). Maxwell was convicted of conspiracy to transport minors with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371; transportation of a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a); and sex trafficking of a minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591(a) and (b)(2). The District Court imposed concurrent terms of imprisonment of 60 months, 120 months, and 240 months, respectively, to be followed by concurrent terms of supervised release\n\n3\nDOJ-OGR-00000004",
  11. "text_blocks": [
  12. {
  13. "type": "printed",
  14. "content": "ANDREW ROHRBACH, Assistant United States Attorney (Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, Won S. Shin, Assistant United States Attorneys, on the brief), for Damian Williams, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, New York, NY, for Appellee.",
  15. "position": "top"
  16. },
  17. {
  18. "type": "printed",
  19. "content": "DIANA FABI SAMSON (Arthur L. Aidala, John M. Leventhal, on the brief), Aidala Bertuna & Kamins PC, New York, NY, for Defendant-Appellant.",
  20. "position": "middle"
  21. },
  22. {
  23. "type": "printed",
  24. "content": "JOSÉ A. CABRANES, Circuit Judge:",
  25. "position": "middle"
  26. },
  27. {
  28. "type": "printed",
  29. "content": "Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell appeals her June 29, 2022, judgment of conviction in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Alison J. Nathan, Judge). Maxwell was convicted of conspiracy to transport minors with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371; transportation of a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a); and sex trafficking of a minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591(a) and (b)(2). The District Court imposed concurrent terms of imprisonment of 60 months, 120 months, and 240 months, respectively, to be followed by concurrent terms of supervised release",
  30. "position": "middle"
  31. },
  32. {
  33. "type": "printed",
  34. "content": "3",
  35. "position": "bottom"
  36. },
  37. {
  38. "type": "printed",
  39. "content": "DOJ-OGR-00000004",
  40. "position": "bottom"
  41. }
  42. ],
  43. "entities": {
  44. "people": [
  45. "Andrew Rohrbach",
  46. "Maurene Comey",
  47. "Alison Moe",
  48. "Lara Pomerantz",
  49. "Won S. Shin",
  50. "Damian Williams",
  51. "Diana Fabi Samson",
  52. "Arthur L. Aidala",
  53. "John M. Leventhal",
  54. "José A. Cabranes",
  55. "Ghislaine Maxwell",
  56. "Alison J. Nathan"
  57. ],
  58. "organizations": [
  59. "United States District Court",
  60. "Southern District of New York",
  61. "Aidala Bertuna & Kamins PC"
  62. ],
  63. "locations": [
  64. "New York"
  65. ],
  66. "dates": [
  67. "June 29, 2022",
  68. "09/17/2024"
  69. ],
  70. "reference_numbers": [
  71. "22-1426",
  72. "109-1",
  73. "3634097",
  74. "DOJ-OGR-00000004"
  75. ]
  76. },
  77. "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court document, specifically a page from a legal brief or opinion. The text is printed and there are no visible stamps or handwritten notes. The document is well-formatted and easy to read."
  78. }