DOJ-OGR-00000229.tif

6 Petitioner moved to dismiss the indictment, arguing that the coconspirators clause of Epstein’s NPA, see p. 4, supra, barred her prosecution because she was charged as Epstein’s coconspirator. Pet. App. 55a. The district court denied the motion, finding that the NPA bound only the Florida USAO. Id. at 56a-58a. The court further found that most of the charged offenses would have fallen outside the scope of the NPA even if it had applied to the New York USAO. See id. at 59a-60a.' Petitioner was tried on the nonperjury counts in 2021, Gov’t C.A. Br. 2, and the jury found her guilty on five counts, Pet. App. 39a. The district court entered judgment on three of those counts, dismissed two on multiplicity grounds, and sentenced petitioner to 240 months of imprisonment. /d. at 39a-41a. 3. The court of appeals affirmed. Pet. App. la-23a. It rejected, among other claims, petitioner’s contention that Epstein’s NPA barred her prosecution. Jd. at 8a- 12a. The court cited circuit precedent for the proposi- tion that a “plea agreement binds only the office of the United States Attorney for the district in which the plea is entered unless it affirmatively appears that the agree- ment contemplates a broader restriction.” Jd. at 8a (quoting United States v. Annabi, 771 F.2d 670, 672 (2d Cir. 1985) (per curiam)). And here, the court found, “(njo-thing in the text of the NPA or its negotiation his- tory suggests that the NPA precluded USAO-SDNY from prosecuting Maxwell” for the charged offenses. Id. at 12a. ! The district court did not address whether the two counts that were added between the first and second superseding indictments would have fallen within the scope of the NPA. See D. Ct. Doc. 317, at 2-5 (Aug. 18, 2021). DOJ-OGR-00000229