UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK¶
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,¶
V.¶
GHISLAINE MAXWELL,¶
20 Cr. 330 (AJN)¶
Defendant.¶
REPLY MEMORANDUM OF GHISLAINE MAXWELL¶
IN SUPPORT OF HER MOTION UNDER THE FOURTH AMENDMENT, MARTINDELL, AND THE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO SUPPRESS ALL EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE GOVERNMENT’S SUBPOENA TO BOIES SCHILLER AND TO DISMISS COUNTS FIVE AND SIX¶
Jeffrey S. Pagliuca¶
Laura A. Menninger¶
HADDON, MORGAN & FOREMAN P.C.¶
Christian R. Everdell¶
COHEN & GRESSER LLP¶
Bobbi C. Sternheim¶
Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim¶
Attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell¶
EFTA00097331¶
TABLE OF CONTENTS¶
| TABLE OF CONTENTS | ii |
| TABLE OF AUTHORITIES | iii |
| TABLE OF EXHIBITS | v |
| Factual Background | 1 |
| Argument | 1 |
| I. The Government’s violation of the Fourth Amendment requires suppression | 1 |
| A. Maxwell has standing. | 1 |
| B. There is no good faith. | 5 |
| C. The government’s inevitable discovery doctrine fails. | 5 |
| II. The Government’s violation of Martindell requires suppression | 7 |
| III. The Government’s violation of the Fifth Amendment requires suppression | 10 |
| IV. The Court should hold an evidentiary hearing | 13 |
| CONCLUSION | 13 |
| Certificate of Service | 15 |
ii¶
EFTA00097332¶
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES¶
Cases¶
| Appeal of Hughes, 633 F.2d 282 (3d Cir. 1980) | 2 |
| Carpenter v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 2206 (2018) | 2, 3 |
| Doe v. Indyke, Case No., 20-cv-00484 (S.D.N.Y.) | 6 |
| v. Maxwell, 325 F. Supp. 3d 428 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) | 6 |
| Matter of Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated Feb. 18, 1988, 685 F. Supp. 49(S.D.N.Y. 1988) | 1 |
| Raheem v. Kelly, 257 F.3d 122 (2d Cir. 2001) | 9 |
| Refco Grp. Ltd., LLC v. Cantor Fitzgerald, L.P., No. 13 CIV. 1654 RA HBP, 2014 WL 5420225(S.D.N.Y. Oct. 24, 2014) | 2 |
| United States v. Cortina, 630 F.2d 1207 (7th Cir. 1980) | 5 |
| United States v. Heath, 455 F.3d 52 (2d Cir. 2006) | 7 |
| United States v. Lavender, 583 F.2d 630 (2d Cir. 1978) | 2, 4 |
| United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) | 5 |
| United States v. Oshatz, 700 F. Supp. 696 (S.D.N.Y. 1988) | 12 |
| United States v. Stein, 541 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2008) | 10 |
| United States v. Stokes, 733 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2013) | 5, 6, 7 |
| United States v. Taylor, 745 F.3d 15 (2d Cir. 2014) | 12 |
| US Bank Nat. Ass’n v. PHL Variable Ins. Co., No. 12 CIV. 6811 CM JCF, 2012 WL 5395249(S.D.N.Y. Nov. 5, 2012) | 2 |
iii¶
EFTA00097333¶
Other Authorities¶
Stephen Rex Brown, Manhattan federal prosecutors declined to pursue Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell case in 2016, New York Daily News (Oct. 13, 2020) … 11¶
Rules¶
Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b) … 4¶
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) … 13¶
Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(c) … 4¶
Constitutional Provisions¶
U.S. CONST. amend. IV … 1¶
U.S. CONST. amend. V … 1, 9¶
iv¶
EFTA00097334¶
TABLE OF EXHIBITS¶
EXHIBIT A: Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Disclose Alleged “On-going Criminal Investigations by Law Enforcement” or, In the Alternative, to Stay Proceedings. v. Maxwell, No. 15-cv07433-RWS, Apr. 18, 2016¶
EXHIBIT B:¶
KHIBIT B: v. Maxwell, No. 15-cv-07433-RWS, Transcript, Apr. 21, 2016¶
V¶
|¶