DOJ-OGR-00021650.jpg

Case 22-1426, Document 79, 06/29/2023, 3536060, Page3 of 93 PAGE 2. The NPA’s Terms Bind Only the USAO-SDFL..................... 18 3. The District Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion in Declining to Conduct a Hearing.................000 eee ee 27 PoINT II]—The District Court Correctly Concluded that the Charges Were Timely............. 28 A. Applicable Law..........0......0..0... 28 1. Standard of Review............... 28 2. Statutes of Limitations for Offenses Against Children (18 U.S.C. § 3283) and Child Abduction and Sex Offenses (18 US.C. § 3299)... eee 29 3. Retroactivity under Landgraf....... ol. B, DiSBUSS100 «nce ser esac teresa ewe 31 1. There Was No Impermissible Retroactivity in Applying Section 3283 to Maxwell ...................0.. eal a. There Was No Retroactivity as to Counts Three and Six.......... iS b. Applying Section 3283 to Maxwell Complies with Landgraf........ 33 1. Landgraf Step One......... 33 DOJ-OGR-00021650