Legal Opinion
United States v. Michael Mays
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided October 19, 2005No. 04-50378PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge.
We consider whether a federal district court may garnish the wages of a criminal defendant who fails to pay a judgment of restitution imposed by that court.
Facts
Michael Mays pled guilty to conspiracy to commit mail fraud. The court imposed a custodial sentence and supervised release. Pursuant to the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 (MVRA), Pub.L. No. 104-132,110 Stat. 1227 (1996) (codified in relevant part at 18 U.S.C. §§ 3663A-3664), the court ordered Mays to pay restitution. See id. § 3556.
Mays made only nominal payments on his judgment and, so,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Cannon v. University of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Catlin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- United States v. SatterfieldCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1984
- Steccone v. Morse-Starrett Products Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1951
- Loeber v. SchroederSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- United States v. MorelandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- United States v. GianelliCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- United States v. KollintzasCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007
- Kipperman v. Onex Corp.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 2009
- United States v. MorelandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.