State v. Maxwell
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WORKE, Judge.
Appellant challenges the district court’s restitution order, arguing that (1) he is entitled to a jury trial to determine the underlying facts on which the amount of restitution was based, and (2) the district court erred when it ordered restitution because there was an insufficient causal nexus between appellant’s crimes and the victim’s losses. We affirm.
*851FACTS
Appellant Larry Darnell Maxwell was involved in a real-estate scheme, procuring more than $2,000,000 in fraudulent mortgage loans. Appellant used his association with and control over a real-estate-brokerage…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- People v. HorneNew York Court of Appeals · 2002
- United States v. Lionel Reifler, Glenn B. Laken, John M. Black, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
- United States v. WootenCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. HuffCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2014
- Michaels v. First USA Title, LLCCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2014
- 10 — Crimes — ForgeryColorado Court of Appeals · 2018
- Peter Loren Martel v. State of MinnesotaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2015
- State of Iowa v. Caesar Charles DavisonSupreme Court of Iowa · 2022
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.