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
- New leadership team takes helm at State Bar
- Four weeks before Election Day, mail ballot returns are up 30% over same point in 2022
- Belleville woman arraigned in connection with alleged arson, felonious assault
- Warren man pleads No Contest to Felonious Assault and dog stabbing
- Woman sentenced for mortgage fraud, filing a false $374,000 tax refund return
headlines National
- Melissa Hart, the chair of the ABA Legal Ed council, dies
- Judge suspended after indictment over alleged perjury
- Bill Withers’ music publisher files copyright suit over Olivia Dean’s ‘I’ve Seen It’
- Judge reinstates US attorney in Washington fired by Trump
- Interim law dean of University of Florida named to permanent role
- Clio acquires Learned Hand, an AI company for courts, judges
