United States v. Michael Wright
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
EMILIO M. GARZA,
Circuit Judge, joined by CARL E. STEWART, Chief Judge, and E. GRADY JOLLY, EDITH H. JONES, EDITH BROWN CLEMENT, PRADO, OWEN, JENNIFER WALKER ELROD and HAYNES, Circuit Judges:
The issue presented to the en banc court is whether 18 U.S.C. § 2259 requires a district court to find that a defendant’s criminal acts proximately caused a crime victim’s losses before the district court may order restitution, even though that statute only contains a “proximate l'esult” requirement in § 2259(b)(3)(F). All our sister circuits that have addressed this question have expanded the meaning of §…
2Cases cited66 opinions
- Taylor v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Connecticut National Bank v. GermainSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Morissette v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- New York v. FerberSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Barnhart v. ThomasSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
61 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- United States v. Christopher LaranetaCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2012
- United States v. Doyle ParolineCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2012
- Amy & Vicky v. United States District Court for the Western DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- United States v. Ronald SlovacekCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2012
- Campbell v. SimsDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2021