WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court says a person convicted of a crime and later ordered to pay the victim must file a separate appeal to challenge the order.
The justices recently ruled 6-2 against a Florida man who was convicted of possessing child pornography and ordered to pay $4,500 to cover the victim’s loss.
Marcelo Manrique appealed his conviction, but not the restitution order, which came about two months later.
Manrique argued his initial appeal covered the later judgment.
But the Supreme Court said he should have filed a second appeal when restitution was ordered.
A federal appeals court also ruled against him.
The decision clarifies an area of law that has confused lower courts about when appeals must be filed to challenge orders that can come months after conviction.
- Posted April 26, 2017
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
Justices require new appeal for challenging victim awards
headlines Macomb
- Macomb County Meals on Wheels in urgent need of volunteers ahead of holiday season
- MDHHS hosting three, free virtual baby showers in November and December for new or expecting families
- MDHHS secures nearly 100 new juvenile justice placements through partnerships with local communities and providers
- MDHHS seeking proposals for student internship stipend program to enhance behavioral health workforce
- ABA webinar November 30 to explore the state of civil legal aid in America
headlines National
- Protecting Attorney-Client Relationships: ABA advocacy helps safeguard the right to effective assistance of counsel
- Did ‘corporate speak’ and PowerPoint lead to complacency at GM?
- Ex-employee sues Sheppard Mullin over cyberattack exposing sensitive personal data
- Ropes & Gray allows more attorneys to count AI testing toward billable hours
- Plaintiff who filed fraudulent case, trashed desktop computer hit with sanctions
- Man who threatened Supreme Court justices avoids prison time
