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
- Foundation leader doubles as general counsel for area firm
- Travelers will need a compliant document to fly in U.S. starting May 7
- New date set for final hearing in pandemic-era class action against UIA
- Detroit couple charged with making nearly $150,000 in fraudulent disability claims
- Michigan retailers see drastic drop in February sales activity
headlines National
- Helping Hand: Swapna Reddy is helping asylum-seekers navigate the immigration system
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- Citing ‘anti-democratic takeover’ by ‘activist’ plaintiffs, Trump seeks money bond for injunction requests
- Law prof suspended over exam question, class discussion can sue for First Amendment retaliation, 7th Circuit says
- On-campus recruiting for summer associates falls in popularity as law firms ‘jockey for positions’
- Former lawyer gets prison time after posing as BigLaw alum, former football player in quest for jobs