epstein-docs.github.io/results/IMAGES002/DOJ-OGR-00005818.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "35 of 84",
    "document_number": "397",
    "date": "10/29/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 397 Filed 10/29/21 Page 35 of 84 as part of the very act charged, or, at least, proof of that act.\" Quinones, 511 F.3d at 309 (internal citations and quotations marks omitted). Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) allows for the admission of uncharged crimes, wrongs, or other acts for purposes other than proving criminal propensity, \"such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident.\" Fed. R. Evid. 404(b). The Second Circuit \"has long adopted an 'inclusionary' approach to the admission of uncharged crime evidence, under which evidence of prior crimes, wrongs, or acts is admissible for any purpose other than to show a defendant's criminal propensity.\" United States v. Paulino, 445 F.3d 211, 221 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted). Where the defendant claims her conduct has an innocent explanation, the admission of such evidence of other acts is particularly appropriate. See, e.g., United States v. Zackson, 12 F.3d 1178, 1182 (2d Cir. 1993) (\"Where a defendant claims that his conduct has an innocent explanation, prior act evidence is generally admissible to prove that the defendant acted with the state of mind necessary to commit the offense charged.\") Where evidence is offered for a proper purpose under Rule 404(b), it may only be excluded if the probative value of the evidence is \"substantially outweighed\" by the danger of unfair prejudice. Id. at 1182; see Fed. R. Evid. 403. Until December 1, 2020, the Government was required to provide \"reasonable notice of the general nature of any such evidence that the prosecutor intends to offer at trial.\" Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(2)(A) (2011). On December 1, 2020, the rule was amended (the \"2020 Amendments\") to require the Government to also \"articulate in the notice the permitted purpose for which the prosecutor intends to offer the evidence and the reasoning that supports the purpose.\" Fed. R. 34 DOJ-OGR-00005818",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 397 Filed 10/29/21 Page 35 of 84",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "as part of the very act charged, or, at least, proof of that act.\" Quinones, 511 F.3d at 309 (internal citations and quotations marks omitted). Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) allows for the admission of uncharged crimes, wrongs, or other acts for purposes other than proving criminal propensity, \"such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident.\" Fed. R. Evid. 404(b). The Second Circuit \"has long adopted an 'inclusionary' approach to the admission of uncharged crime evidence, under which evidence of prior crimes, wrongs, or acts is admissible for any purpose other than to show a defendant's criminal propensity.\" United States v. Paulino, 445 F.3d 211, 221 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted). Where the defendant claims her conduct has an innocent explanation, the admission of such evidence of other acts is particularly appropriate. See, e.g., United States v. Zackson, 12 F.3d 1178, 1182 (2d Cir. 1993) (\"Where a defendant claims that his conduct has an innocent explanation, prior act evidence is generally admissible to prove that the defendant acted with the state of mind necessary to commit the offense charged.\") Where evidence is offered for a proper purpose under Rule 404(b), it may only be excluded if the probative value of the evidence is \"substantially outweighed\" by the danger of unfair prejudice. Id. at 1182; see Fed. R. Evid. 403. Until December 1, 2020, the Government was required to provide \"reasonable notice of the general nature of any such evidence that the prosecutor intends to offer at trial.\" Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(2)(A) (2011). On December 1, 2020, the rule was amended (the \"2020 Amendments\") to require the Government to also \"articulate in the notice the permitted purpose for which the prosecutor intends to offer the evidence and the reasoning that supports the purpose.\" Fed. R.",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "34",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00005818",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [],
    "organizations": [
      "Second Circuit"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "December 1, 2020",
      "10/29/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "397",
      "511 F.3d",
      "445 F.3d 211",
      "12 F.3d 1178"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case, discussing the admissibility of evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b). The text is well-formatted and clear, with no visible redactions or damage."
}