EPSTEIN
page 12 / 1261 . OCR, unverified
CERTIORARI in the above-captioned case were served, as required by U.S. Supreme Court Rule
29.5(c), on the following:
D. JOHN SAUER
Solicitor General
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20530
(202) 514-2217
Counsel for United States of America
The following email addresses have also been served electronically:
supremectbriefs@usdo}.gov
dmarkus@markuslaw.com wQ—
ROBYN DORSEY WILLIS
WILSON-EPES PRINTING CO., INC.
1115 H Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20002
(202) 789-0096
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 10th day of Apri]-2025.
QettTHe bt Begg,
a IND “Ou, oT
Sk o-", AYA SMINDER DONNER
62, Hp - 04) JS ome District of Columbia
: : Lan . 32,2 +7} ; . . .
294 My 02 : 3 My commission expires April 30, 2029.
20. YOLK Jed
Nn yt. wwe?
“4 “> “ecee Po e >
am Or cow"
“Fase
DOJ-OGR- 00000032
==================== END OF root__DOJ-OGR-00000032.tif.txt ====================
==================== START OF root__DOJ-OGR-00000033.tif.txt ====================
METADATA_SOURCE: .
METADATA_FILENAME: DOJ-OGR-00000033.tif
----------------------------------------
No. 24-___
IN THE
Supreme Court of the Anited States
GHISLAINE MAXWELL, AKA SEALED DEFENDANT 1,
Petitioner,
Vv.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the
United States Court of Appeals
for the Second Circuit
PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
As required by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(h), I certify that the document contains
4,956 words, excluding the parts of the document that are exempted by Supreme Court
Rule 33.1(d).
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 10th day of April 202
KS
DER DONNER
NOTARY PUBLIC
District of Columbia
tag My commission expires April 30, 2029.
er ee tee 6, %
Aye "Sy,
r PvP WOTAR A Z%
z ’ *P * 04/39 20291” 3
WS UBuie fF
“, Ve he - x
ya
Tarrant
DOJ-OGR-00000033
==================== END OF root__DOJ-OGR-00000033.tif.txt ====================
==================== START OF root__DOJ-OGR-00000034.tif.txt ====================
METADATA_SOURCE: .
METADATA_FILENAME: DOJ-OGR-00000034.tif
----------------------------------------
No. 24-
IN THE
Supreme Court of the Anited States
GHISLAINE MAXWELL, AKA SEALED DEFENDANT 1,
Petitioner,
Vv.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the
United States Court of Appeals
for the Second Circuit
PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
DAVID OSCAR MARKUS
Counsel of Record
MARKUS/Moss PLLC
40 N.W. Third Street
Penthouse One
Miami, FL 33128
(305) 379-6667
dmarkus@markuslaw.com
Counsel for Petitioner
April 10, 2025
WILSON-EPES PRINTING Co., INC. — (202) 789-0096 — WASHINGTON, D.C. 20002
DOJ-OGR- 00000034
==================== END OF root__DOJ-OGR-00000034.tif.txt ====================
==================== START OF root__DOJ-OGR-00000035.tif.txt ====================
METADATA_SOURCE: .
METADATA_FILENAME: DOJ-OGR-00000035.tif
----------------------------------------
QUESTION PRESENTED
This Court long has recognized that “when a plea
rests in any significant degree on a promise or
agreement of the prosecutor, so that it can be said to
be part of the inducement or consideration, such
promise must be fulfilled.” Santobello v. New York, 404
U.S. 257 (1971). And, of course, it is well settled that
plea agreements and non-prosecution agreements are
interpreted using ordinary principles of contract
construction, requiring that the plain language of the
agreement must govern interpretation and _ that
ambiguities must be resolved against the Government.
Nevertheless, Circuits are split on whether promises
in a plea agreement in one district on behalf of the
“United States” or the “Government” binds the
Government in other districts.
The question presented here is:
Under Santobello and common principles of contract
interpretation, does a promise on behalf of the
“United States” or the “Government” that is made by a
United States Attorney in one district bind federal
prosecutors in other districts?
(i)
DOJ-OGR-00000035
==================== END OF root__DOJ-OGR-00000035.tif.txt ====================
==================== START OF root__DOJ-OGR-00000036.tif.txt ====================
METADATA_SOURCE: .
METADATA_FILENAME: DOJ-OGR-00000036.tif
----------------------------------------
i
PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING
Petitioner Ghislaine Maxwell was the Defendant in
the district court and the Appellant in the Second
Circuit. Respondent is the United States.
RELATED PROCEEDINGS
This case arises from the following proceedings:
e United States v. Maxwell, 118 F.4th 256 (2d
Cir. 2024), reh’g denied, November 25, 2024.
Judgment entered September 17, 2024.
e United States v. Maxwell, 534 F. Supp. 3d 299
(S.D.N.Y. 2021).
DOJ-OGR-00000036
==================== END OF root__DOJ-OGR-00000036.tif.txt ====================
==================== START OF root__DOJ-OGR-00000037.tif.txt ====================