Legal Opinion

United States v. Gerald Green

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided July 11, 2013No. 10-50519, 10-50524PublishedCited by 49 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

KOZINSKI, Chief Judge:

Forget life and liberty. This appeal concerns another precious thing we take from criminal defendants: their money.

Defendants Gerald and Patricia Green claim the district court violated Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), when it ordered them to pay restitution without a jury’s finding that there was “an identifiable victim or victims” who suffered a “pecuniary loss” — findings required to trigger restitution under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act. Though oUr caselaw holds that Apprendi doesn’t apply to restitution…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  4. Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  5. Miller v. GammieCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003

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

3Cited by49 opinions

  1. Damian Langere v. Verizon Wireless ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
  2. Commonwealth v. DenehyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2014
  3. United States v. Marco LuisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
  4. United States v. Christopher GeorgeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
  5. United States v. Roxanne EyraudCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015

44 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