D.D.C. Notes Split Re Definition of the Term "Proceeds"

Per U.S. v. Palfrey, --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2007 WL 2327078 (D.D.C . Aug 16, 2007) (NO. CRIM.07-46GK):

The Indictment in this case alleges facts that are more than sufficient to inform Defendant of the offense charged as required by Hamling. Specifically, the Indictment alleges that Defendant hired women to perform prostitution activities for customers of Pamela Martin and Associates; that Defendant directed those women to convert a portion of the funds from those activities into money orders and send them via the United States mail to Defendant in California; that Defendant maintained United States Post Office Box 1211 in Benicia, California 94510 for receipt of portions of the proceeds of said prostitution activities; and that Defendant would receive the money orders and deposit them into her own accounts in California and use them to support the enterprise. Indictment ΒΆΒΆ 10, 17-18. As Defendant concedes, the Indictment "contain[s] a modest description of the alleged organizational structure of Ms. Palfrey's business." Def.'s Mot. (Dkt. No. 65) at 6. Although modest, the Court finds that the description is constitutionally sufficient.

Defendant further argues that ambiguity of the term "proceeds," as evidenced by a circuit split on the precise definition of that term, deprives her of constitutionally required notice of the charge. Def.'s Mot (Dkt. No. 65) at 7-8; compare United States v. Santos, 461 F.3d 886 (7th Cir.2006), cert. granted, --- U.S. ----, 127 S.Ct. 2098, 167 L.Ed.2d 812 (2007) (defining "proceeds" as "gross income") and United States v. Iacoboni, 363 F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir.2004) (same) with United States v. Scialabba, 282 F.3d 475 (7th Cir.2000) (defining "proceeds" as "net income"). Since "proceeds" is not further defined in the Indictment, she argues, it is unclear whether the Grand Jury considered her "net income" or her "gross income" to return the Indictment in this case. She contends that this ambiguity undercuts her ability to fight the charges against her.


At 7:12 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Song of Deborah

...They chose new gods; then was war in the gates... Awake, awake, Deborah: awake, awake, utter a song... the LORD made you have dominion over the mighty... Curse ye Meroz, said the angel of the LORD, curse ye bitterly the inhabitants thereof; because they came not to the help of the LORD, to the help of Justice against the mighty... Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? So let all thine enemies perish, O LORD: but let them that love him be as the sun when he goeth forth in his might. And the land rest forty years. Judges 5.

Deborah Palfrey deserves the Pemberton Award for Clean Governance.
Palfrey list is like the Black Book of 1918.
That Trial of the century is deleted from all books.
The list there had 47000 names.
The list here has 46000 phone bills.
The listed are not womenizers, machos or ordinary sinners.
They are power brokers, gay lutheran whock n awe blitzkrieg agitators of all wars and all panics.
These wretches are one dirty cover to the real pimps deep undercover.
A curse on the kingpins, Justice Charles Darling then and Judge Adolph Kramer Kessler now.

Noel Pemberton-Billing
Trial of the Century 1918


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Visit Aspen Publishers today! Free Shipping!