Legal Opinion
United States v. Berk
District Court, D. Maine
Decided October 29, 2009No. 1:08-cv-00212PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ON RESTITUTION
GEORGE Z. SINGAL, District Judge.
Before the Court is the Government’s request for restitution on behalf of “Amy” and “Vicky” — two individuals allegedly depicted in pornographic images that Defendant Michael Berk unlawfully possessed.
For the reasons explained below, the Court DECLINES to order restitution.
I. APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARD
Whether restitution is an appropriate sanction for an offender convicted of possessing child pornography appears to be an issue of first impression in this district. The authority for the Government’s request is 18 U.S.C. § 2259, which provides:
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Connecticut National Bank v. GermainSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- New York v. FerberSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Kelly v. RobinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Rust v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Hughey v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Jane Doe v. Alan HeskethCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2016
- United States v. ParolineDistrict Court, E.D. Texas · 2009
- United States v. ChurchDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 2010
- United States v. MonzelDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
- United States v. HardyDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2010
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.