Legal Opinion

United States v. Anne Hankins

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided June 6, 2017No. 15-30345PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

McKEOWN, Circuit Judge:

In this appeal we resolve two related questions of first impression in our circuit that arise out of the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 (“MVRA”), a statute that requires certain criminal defendants to pay restitution to compensate and assist victims. We first determine whether a defendant may discharge a restitution judgment based on a private settlement between the victim and the defendant. The answer is no—restitution is a criminal sentence that cannot be extinguished by a victim’s disclaimer of benefits. Relatedly, we decide whether a district court…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Muscarello v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  2. Mobil Oil Corp. v. HigginbothamSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. United States v. Paul J. SavoieCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993
  4. United States v. KleinSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  5. United States v. Jack BeardenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2001

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. United States v. MyersCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2025
  2. Wilkinson v. ParkerLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2018
  3. United States v. Alston Orlando Leroy WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2021
  4. United States v. John Jerome O'HaraCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2024
  5. United States v. MyersCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2026

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API